Flag for Taxon: Helianthemum patens
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| kai_schablewski | Helianthemum patens |
Probably Part of the genus Crocanthemum |
Aug. 23, 2019 11:23:31 +0000 | bouteloua |
taxon is inactive |
Comments
Looks like @najera_tutor committed 3 swaps curating away from POWO re: Helianthemum -> Crocanthemum https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_swaps/75439
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_swaps/75441
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_swaps/75440
This is the only relevant flag I can find on this but doesn't look like a deviation was agreed on.
I'm personally in favor of sticking with POWO here. Curious what others think (e.g. @bouteloua , @jdmore)
If we don't deviate - I can revert these taxon changes
If we do deviate, in the future lets please discuss and agree first before curating away from POWO and make sure we edit the taxon_framework_relationships to document the deviation (which wasn't done here).
Catalogue of Life treats them as Crocanthemum spec. comb.ined. (provisionally accepted name), these species belong to the genus Crocanthemum but i think they have not been officially moved there yet, therefore the official name for these taxa is still Helianthemum.
Its probably the same thing with several species of Loasa that actually belong to Pinnasa. We might have to wait.
IMO Catalogue of Life isn't a great reference for plants. Looks like FNA goes with Crocanthemum
http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=108390
But as usual if we were to deviate from Helianthemum we'd need a complete mapping from all the species in Helianthemum sensu POWO to the split off genera you're proposing (e.g. Crocanthemum)
Sticking with POWO would certainly be easier
It looks like POWO has both Crocanthemum and Helianthemum, so I guess this isn't as simple as a simple case of splitting off a genus. Is the issue that POWO still has certain species in Helianthemum that we think should be moved over to Crocanthemum? Which of the 116 species listed here are they (and their Crocanthemum equivs)
http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:30002303-2#children
Are they just these three:
Helianthemum coulteri -> Crocanthemum coulteri
Helianthemum patens -> Crocanthemum patens
Helianthemum pugae -> Crocanthemum pugae
or are there more?
If we wait for POWO to do so then there is not much citizen science here to do.
if Crocanthemum is for the "new continent" and Helianthemum is for the "old continent" what are we waiting for, POWO's approval?
we just need to compare distributions and fix the taxonomy, it is not even much of a problem unless we want to follow POWO religiously and do not follow the first premise for the scientific method, "always to question"
i go for the option to make a revision, we just need to check specie by specie to see its origin and discriminate ones from another, as far as i know
Helianthemum chihuahuense S.Watson = Crocanthemum chihuahuense
Helianthemum coulteri S.Watson = Crocanthemum coulteri
Helianthemum patens Hemsl. = Crocanthemum patens
Helianthemum pugae Calderón = Crocanthemum pugae
Maybe @linusrm can help us by revising in the local herbarium for any other specie of Helianthemum in the country
Thanks - lets get the entire list of Helianthemum sensu POWO that we are moving to Crocanthemum so we can properly structure the deviation. Then I'm in favor of deviating
As @kai_schablewski noted, and as far as I can tell also, the combinations Crocanthemum chihuahuense, Crocanthemum coulteri, Crocanthemum patens, and Crocanthemum pugae have never been published in the scientific literature, and so are currently invalid.
For that reason I think we have no choice but to stay with the Helianthemum names for those species for now, regardless of their POWO status, until valid names exist under Crocanthemum. Only then will we have anything to discuss and debate.
The invalid Crocanthemum names should be purged from iNat's taxonomy.
@jdmore so you're arguing to follow POWO until the names Crocanthemum chihuahuense, Crocanthemum coulteri, Crocanthemum patens, and Crocanthemum pugae are published? Are you ok with that @najera_tutor? I'm not personally as opposed to using unpublished names as long as they are 'inherited' by upstream changes like genus splits. But I am aware that doing that bothers a lot of people on iNat for the arguments laid out by jdmore and I'd like to avoid controversy
Yeah, allowing unpublished names to proliferate in iNaturalist taxonomy opens up a big can 'o worms, and starts it rolling down a very slippery slope. Really don't think we want to go there.
yes, the species are published under Helianthemum not under Crocanthemum, so if we have to wait for an specific article to redescribe this species then tun it back to Helianthemum and lets maintain an European genera as also present in a specific part in the Americas (¡?) until POWO or so say so
najera_tutor I'm not sure I'm following 100% - what are you recommending we do?
I would move the species that are not yet described as Crocanthemum back to Helianthemum. But i would also add the Crocanthemum comb. ined. names to the synonymes, so that it is also possible to find the taxa if someone searches for Crocanthemum instead of Helianthemum. Once they are redescribed we can finally move them to Crocanthemum where they belong.
I hope this provisional treatment will not last very long and that someone really is redescribing those taxa...
I agree with @kai_schablewski's first suggestion. But I'm not in favor of adding unpublished scientific names even as synonyms. It can give the wrong impression that those names actually exist, and are therefore available to create and swap as taxa in iNaturalist. And it's also just poor form to be anticipating someone's publication by using their names ahead of time.
yes, maintain it as Helianthemum so far
ok so to be clear - the plan is to follow POWO exactly which means keeping taxa like Helianthemum chihuahuense in Helianthemum but also leaving other New world taxa into Crocanthemum, e.g. Crocanthemum scoparium?
As far as I am concerned, yes
Yes, that is my recommendation. And I would suggest leaving this flag unresolved to indicate that this is a pending issue.
Someone apparently ignored this flag and swapped it into a taxon using the still-invalid name Crocanthemum patens. I have now flagged that taxon: https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/576461, plus C. coulteri (https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/576463) and C. pugae (https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/576464) which have the same issue.
Most former species of Helianthemum in North America have already been moved to Crocanthemum except several species in Mexico.
https://www.gbif.org/species/8089480
http://www.catalogueoflife.org/col/details/species/id/3b1dd5f19ccc4e911317c278163dc32a
...but still as Helianthemum patens on POWO
http://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:169065-1