Flagger Content Author Content Reason Flag Created Resolved by Resolution
loarie Earwigs (Order Dermaptera)

keep Dermaptera Species Files taxon framework?

May. 10, 2021 19:11:28 +0000 loarie

see comments

Comments

We're currently using Demaptera Species File (DSF) as a taxon framework for Dermaptera https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/47793/taxonomy_details

but some recent flags
https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/528642
https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/508516
https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/139929
propose changes not yet in DSF

We can deviate to accomodate the changes. But it might be worth checking in whether folks want to keep using DSF. In my experience if the reference is doing a good job of keeping up to date, has broad buy in by the community, and better yet if one of the people involved in the reference is active on iNat, then its usually worth sticking with the reference. But if not, it might be a bottle neck. I'm not sure which is the case for DSF

Feedback welcome thanks!

@brandonwoo
@konstakal
@szucsich
@fuerchtegott
@fdusoulier

(see a similar discussion about using Species File for Walking Sticks here https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/260037)

Posted by loarie almost 3 years ago

I do not know to much about DSF, since Dermaptera is not really my group of main competence.
As far as I see it, the change in F. auricularia has a huge impact on observations.
I will be happy to help, it you choose for changing, to sort the observations.
All the best
Nikola

Posted by szucsich almost 3 years ago

I sent an email to Heidi Hopkins @ Dermaptera Species File and she's been very encouraging and responsive about looking into iNat taxonomy flags with this group indicating discrepancies with DSF. So given that and given that no one has objected here I suggest we stick with this reference (we can still deviate on a case by case basis as needed). I'll close this flag but I linked to it here for reference
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/47793-Dermaptera/taxonomy_details

Looks like this group is in pretty good shape - just 14 open flags mostly referring to the 11 'relationship unknown's' if you can help with any of these, please do!

Thanks all

Posted by loarie almost 3 years ago

I think DSF is a good source, but far from perfect. To keep the taxonomy up to date several sources would be needed, including scientific papers.

Splitting F. auricularia would cause much chaos in my opinion, because you can't identify the 28k observations. Their distribution would remain unknown. Further research on the species complex would be necessary. But changing the species into a species complex would work imo.

Posted by stephankleinfelder over 1 year ago

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments