iNat currently follows FishBase in continuing to accept a broad concept of L. guttatus, which includes L. australensis. https://www.fishbase.in/summary/1072

@loarie @maractwin Time to deviate? See Underkoffler et al. 2018.

I'm for deviating - splitting this recently described taxon from the Northern Hemisphere L. guttatus
https://fishesofaustralia.net.au/home/species/1870

Did this get fixed?

does L. guttatus need to be split or can Lampris australensis just be grafted in?

re: my previous comment - what I meant by does L. guttatus need to be split is:
based on these observations of L. guttatus
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?verifiable=true&taxon_id=122916&place_id=&preferred_place_id=1&locale=en
will adding Lampris australensis (which implies carving off a piece of and thus narrowing what we mean by L. guttatus) change the interpretation of any of the existing identifications? e.g. if someone meant L. guttatus in the broad sense by an ID and interpreting it as L. guttatus in the narrow sense would make the ID wrong
If so we need to split
if not we can just add Lampris australensis
Thanks!

Thank you @rfoster. You're a champion. :)

Yes, I'm aware of that - thanks. I have added the other species as inactive taxon records but I'm going to have to atlas them all before the split can be made. Not easy given the vast expanses of ocean and our rather vague knowledge of where they occur.

From memory, I didn't know how to proceed further.
For example, from what I could find Lampris megalopsis (Bigeye Pacific Opah) is widespread, with evidence of the species from the coasts of American Samoa , Australia, Chile and Indonesia, from the central northern Pacific, the Gulf of Mexico and from the southwest (coast of South Africa) Indian Ocean. If we atlas that it'll override just about all the atlases and revert everything to genus level.

Yes, I think rolling all observations of L. guttatus back to genus may be the most parsimonious solution. Of the dozen or so observations only one looks likely to be correct, based on locality. It's a good learning exercise, for interested parties, to have to come to grips with the new taxonomy and diagnostics and re-examine the observations, anyway, I think.

It's gonna be very messy as Lampris guttatus was one of those taxa that attracts LOTS of superfluous IDs.

ok committed - here's the obs with IDs that were rolled back in case anyone is interested in rolling them forward
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=needs_id%2Cresearch&verifiable=any&id=114534066%2C106136097%2C55534004%2C18704089%2C4002826%2C2410374%2C643015%2C470816%2C41654878%2C48719076%2C15746257%2C101701700%2C101701683%2C35850574%2C57403562%2C18704080%2C20516801%2C12815983%2C5600891%2C5579967%2C5578598%2C5578548%2C5549077%2C4734065%2C4734021%2C5409237%2C5240382%2C5193506%2C5111412%2C5111383