Flag for Taxon: Long-tailed Porcupine (Coendou longicaudatus)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| deboas | Long-tailed Porcupine (Coendou longicaudatus) |
it seems to have been added without doing a taxon change to bring along observations of C. prehensilis that are of this taxon. Was this intentional |
Jan. 17, 2023 12:27:45 +0000 | loarie |
Comments
I Agree
I think a split should still be done, as there are a good number of observations that need to be moved.
is there a good source for the ranges of the two species?
I think this is the most relevant source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jzs.12529 but I don't have access to the full text. From the abstract: "These three clades represent valid species: C. prehensilis (restricted to the north of the Atlantic Forest), C. baturitensis (occurring in the eastern Amazonian and montane forests enclaves in the Caatinga), and C. longicaudatus (two subspecies, C. l. longicaudatus from the Amazon and C. l. boliviensis from Cerrado and Chaco)."
It does seem, based on that abstract, that the majority of current observations of C. prehensilis should now be split as C. l. longicaudatus. But it would be good to get the full text of the paper to check the maps there.
Tagging the top identifiers of both taxa (@victorpaiva28 is already here): @michalsloviak @enricotosto96 @victor_romero
Have access to the full paper, so have created atlases and drafted the split https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/120513
Brilliant, thank you @rjq. I am curious about the various captive specimens in North America. Will those go back to genus, or is there enough information available to be able to say which taxon they are too?
It would be a shame to knock them back to species, as there are many other Coendou species outside of the C. prehensilis complex.
As I understand that @loarie is responsible for the taxon framework for Mammalia (see: https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/44021/taxonomy_details) tagging him for any input prior to this split being committed. I understand that the Mammal Diversity Database is the reference for mammals, and it recognises this split. However, I am not clear as to what extent deviations from the 2019 version of the Database are welcomed.
captive obs (and all obs outside or in overlapping atlas areas) will go back to subgenus but I think thats fine.
This split looks good to me though I'd much prefer someone updates the IUCN range map
if someone pastes in a screenshot here with a line drawn or a figure I can make them
The ranges are not that well-defined as are based on only a few specimens. The W boundary of baturitensis is the Rio Xingu , but the other boundaries are unclear. The S boundary of prehensilis is the Rio Sao Francisco. Will paste screenshot with a few lines added by me
NB There is an IUCN range map for baturitensis but this is wrong, as the new paper has extended the range considerably (so I removed it)
@loarie not sure how best to get the range map to you as can't copy directly into comments, but if you have access to the paper (link above) then the map is in there
OK I did my best with https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jzs.12529
and came up with
splitting now
Looks good @loarie. Is it worth also splitting C. longicaudatus into the two subspecies?
added ssp
I do not suggest any other action now, as it would likely cause more confusion, but when a taxon is split the new species should be added as a taxon change and not as a new species. There are observations that were identified as C. prehensilis that are in fact this taxon, and they appear to have conflicting IDs when in fact it's just that the taxonomy has changed.