Flag for Taxon: wingleaf soapberry (Sapindus saponaria)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| krancmm | wingleaf soapberry (Sapindus saponaria) |
Taxon needs to split off S. drummondii |
Oct. 4, 2019 03:56:22 +0000 | lisa281 |
Taxon split into S. drummondii and S. saponaria |
Comments
I think S. saponaria can be handled as a split, with species being split on the basis of atlases. I want to get some input from others before committing anything
From what I read the swap part was correct as it moved those records that were already designated as S. saponaria var. drummondii to species S. drummondii.
Apparently though the swapper wasn't told/didn't know the second part: that records only entered as S. saponaria (w/o the varietal) also needed to have something done with them...it happens.
Sorry, but I don't know who to tag that can give you reputable input.
@lisa281 Lisa, I just looked at the draft split. I'm certainly no expert on splits, but is there a reason why you used the varietal S. saponaria saponaria (242762) for the split rather than just S. saponaria (62828) since each is now a full species w/o varietals?
Actually I wanted the input (S. saponaria) to split to S. drummondii and S. saponaria based on their atlases, but an output cannot be the same as the input. I was just not sure how best to accomplish that, so I was thinking of an in-between step to get all the S. drummondii observations out, then another step to changed the Wingleaf Soapberry observations from S. saponaria saponaria to just S. saponaria. But I think there's a simpler way to do it, by just creating a new S saponaria ( with a new taxon number) that just includes the limited range of the atlas.
Ah, got it. Noticed that the output couldn't be the same as input on another recent split. I think your "simpler" method is better as well. That method will throw all those preposterous (Asia?! Europe?!) records to at least genus. Too bad they can't be kicked up higher.
Could you add in the split description that any records outside the atlased range are not Sapindus, just in case a user actually questions or looks at the split?
Needing some guidance here. (See original flag from@krancmm) I wanted the input (S. saponaria) to split to S. drummondii and S. saponaria based on their atlases, but an output cannot be the same as the input. I was thinking of an in-between step to get all the S. drummondii observations out, then another step to change the Wingleaf Soapberry observations from S. saponaria saponaria to just S. saponaria. Is there a better way to do this? @sambiology @hanly @suz @bouteloua @krancmm (Please feel free to tag anyone else you think could help!)
@krancmm Thanks for your input! So in order to create the new taxon S. saponaria, I have to inactivate the old S. saponaria, right? Then, can I still do a taxon split from the inactive taxon? I just don't want to do anything that's going to create a bigger mess!
Yep. A bit of a mess, but the subspecies was elevated to species according to the plant authority (Plants of the World Online)... Sapindus saponaria is still a valid species, but the distribution is Mexico and south:
http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:30035906-2#distribution-map
As of now, it's just been a lot of updating ID's to S. drummondii. One by one! I'm usually adverse to ID'ing things to subspecies, but this is a case where I should have -- it would have made all of this easier!
Not going to be the last time something like this happens though. :)
@lisa281 You could re-activate S. saponaria subsp. drummondii then do the split into subspecies and then swap those into their respective full species.
I think the hard part here (and where I can't really help much) is to validate the atlases. The Smithsonian NMNH has records of S. saponaria all throughout Central and South America as well as some farther abroad places like French Polynesia. I suppose you could just split off the area west of the Mississippi in the U.S. (and maybe adjacent Mexico if known)? Not super satisfying...
So we have soapberry that has leaf midribs that are winged (S. saponaria) east of the Mississippi, not winged east of the Mississippi (S. marginatus), and presumably only not winged west of the Mississippi (S. drummondii). Is there anyone with enough experience IDing these on iNat to confirm this geography? If there are winged soapberry west of the Mississippi this whole exercise falls apart.
Ah...we also have S. marginatus on iNat as a synonym for Sapindus saponaria var. saponaria. Will add flag for that with link here so someone doesn't just make a change without knowing the growing backstory.
POWO makes no sense! According to it, among the 14 accepted species, there are NO Sapindus in Texas, Louisiana, Arizona. Look at the distribution map for all Sapindus species: http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:331930-2#distribution-map
If you plant people have to use POWO as the approved source, all I can say is "good luck"!
@krancmm USDA PLANTS a bit better but won't help with the other countries...
https://plants.usda.gov/core/profile?symbol=SASAD
Uses a lot of state checklists and specimens from the University systems so it at least has a shot at a coarse level. POWO distribution data isn't very well sourced for most species as far as I can tell.
I was just going to make that point!
http://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:227434-2#source-KBD POWO’S distribution map has S. drummondii in only Colorado and New Mexico.
Yeah, plant taxonomy is indeed a fun...task. :) Almost as fun as moth ID's! ;)
That's odd that according to POWO, no Sapindus are in TX. Obviously, it's incomplete..
Unfortunately, the Flora of North America hasn't yet published Sapindaceae, so I'll be curious to see how they treat these Sapindus...
http://floranorthamerica.org/families
I don’t think POWO has the distribution correct on S. saponaria, either. My thought on the atlases was to go by USDA PLANTS, plus add Mexico (at least) for drummondii. I’m not sure what to do about other countries. My understanding is that we go by POWO for determining valid names, but clearly their distribution maps are not particularly reliable.
Many of POWO's distributions appear to only come from the Kew herbarium itself (though some species have many sources). I wish they would at least incorporate the other big herbarium records like the Smithsonian NMNH, the french Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, etc since these have a lot of records already accessible on GBIF and other compilations.
Could you use Tropicos for distribution? Has both distribution and specimen records (only 3 specimen records for S. drummondii). Don't know how often it's updated or accuracry but it's a consolidated source at least.
S. saponaria: http://www.tropicos.org/NamePage.aspx?nameid=28600572&tab=distribution
S. drummondii: http://www.tropicos.org/Name/28600899?tab=distribution (Note: under specimens tab there are 2 from Mexico - appears to be a range overlap)
I implemented a taxon split, with the old S. saponaria being split into S. drummondii and a new S. saponaria, based on range. The atlases may still need some work.
Based on question on forum (https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/updating-ids-taxon-swap/6957), If S. drummondii is now officially a species there are a number of records in its range that were entered as S. saponaria (w/o bothering w/ variety designation). Assume there needs to be an atlas for each and then a split. I'm not a plant person so although I see the range on USDA and BONAP for the United States I have no idea how far south into Mexico or beyond it goes.
Flagged on behalf of @txlorax