Flag for Taxon: pussy tails (Genus Ptilotus)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| thammer | pussy tails (Genus Ptilotus) |
The genus is not listed as endangered in Western Australia, but yet iNaturalist says it is. |
Jan. 27, 2020 12:45:16 +0000 | thebeachcomber |
fixed |
Comments
Hi @cmcheatle
Thanks for your response. I figured something like that was the case. Considering that 90% of Ptilotus species occur in WA and most observations will be from this state, it doesn't make sense to obscure the entire genus.
In Western Australia, all threatened and priority species should be obscured. Conservation listed species that are near threatened are given a priority listing from 1 (highest) to 4 (least concern). Only one species is listed as Threatened (Declared Rare Flora), which is Ptilotus pyramidatus.
The WA Government maintains Florabase through the Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions (known under previous names of DPAW, DEC and CALM). This site will give you the priority listed species for Ptilotus by using the search option for Genus "Ptilotus" and conservation status as "any". https://florabase.dpaw.wa.gov.au/search/advanced?family=&genus=Ptilotus+&species=&infrasp=&author=&common=&constat=*¤t=&alien=&ms=&id=&reference=&photo=&colour=&fltime=&habitat=&habit=&soiltype=&layer1=&layer-op=
Feel free to let me know if you have any questions or need any help.
Cheers
Tim
Tagging @peggydnew since she might have been involved in setting the genus-level conservation status and might have some additional context to share.
@thammer - so here is the update
the genus level obscuring record has been removed. It may take a little time for it to take effect, I'm not sure how fast any backend database work that is required to fire off will take.
the statuses for the listed species in WA have all been added based on the data in ALA, I now need to cross reference against the list you provided
I can't find anything on the Florabase page that 'translates' the conservation number codes into an IUCN equivalent. For example P. actinocladus has a conservation code of 1 there, it is not on the ALA list,but A. mitchellii is on the ALA list, but also shows a 1 on Florabase. Can you provide a key to translate these into the best possible ICUN equivalent, since that is what is used on the site.
re-reading the curator guide, it notes that all species designated as Near Threatened or worse need to be obscured by default, so all the species right now are. You, or any member of the WA community, Australian botany community, or anyone in fact can start a discussion via a flag on any species you feel meet the criteria to not be obscured, which is confidence that revealing the locations does not present a threat to the species or individuals.
most of the species that are listed were not in fact even in the iNat database, so they have all been added (with the exception of the unnamed ones, adding of those goes against iNat policies). There clearly are still a good number of members of this species not yet in the iNat database, but i guess that is a project for another time.
Hi @cmcheatle,
Thanks for getting on this and making those changes. Yes, I agree that the community on this site should be conscious of obscuring locations of threatened or potentially threatened taxa.
The Priority Species are similar to "Data Deficient" on the IUCN, but are recognised in Western Australia with these codes in order to direct and inform conservation efforts.
Priority Species (source: https://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/images/documents/plants-animals/threatened-species/Listings/Conservation%20code%20definitions.pdf)
"Possibly threatened species that do not meet survey criteria, or are otherwise data deficient, are added to the Priority Fauna or Priority Flora Lists under Priorities 1, 2 or 3. These three categories are ranked in order of priority for survey and evaluation of conservation status so that consideration can be given to their declaration as threatened fauna or flora."
This state is extremely biodiverse and dozens of new vascular plant species are discovered and named every year. One such example is Ptilotus actinocladus, which is new and probably threatened species (known from only 6 herbarium specimens). It is listed as P1 because not enough is known. It is not included on ALA, because ALA does not maintain an up-to-date list of taxonomic changes; it lags behind the state plant censuses by a few years at least. This is just the reality of not having enough resources to keep up with the amount of taxonomic changes that happen in Australia. The up-to-date and authoritative list for Western Australian Flora is on FloraBase (as the WA Plant Census), which is then shared with the Australian Plant Name Index and Australian Plant Census, which informs the taxonomy that is used on ALA. Similarly the taxonomic backbone on GBIF lags behind the currently accepted taxonomy in the scientific literature, probably explaining the missing species of Ptilotus on iNat.
Cheers
Tim
The Atlas of Living Australia list 25 species in this genus as either Near Threatened or Endangered. i suspect this was entered as a shortcut to avoid having to enter all the entries individually. That being said, in general, users are not supposed to enter genus level obscuring or conservation status unless it is a small genus where all members are at rish (think Rhinos etc).
https://bie.ala.org.au/search?q=ptilotus
Given that there are 46 species alone in WA that have observations in iNat, I guess the only appropriate step is to go through and add those 25 records mentioned above. I will start in on it, but will only remove the genus one once complete to avoid exposing anything inappropriate.
Being from Canada, I don't know any issues or risks related to this species having open locations n far away Australia. For the Near Threatened ones at least, is there a need for them to be obscured ?