| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rynxs | albach | Complex including V. hederifolia, V. sublobata and V. triloba (Complex Veronica hederifolia-sublobata-triloba) |
name needs correction |
Mar. 12, 2023 02:19:44 +0000 | rynxs |
swapped |
Comments
Where do you have that rule from?
From the Curator Guide (https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#complexes):
Species complex should be used sparingly (only when necessary and helpful) and with the following criteria:
-Species complex is monophyletic (i.e. sibling groups of species)
-Complex is recognized in the literature
-A named subgenus, section, or series does not already exist for the group
-If a "principal species name" is not established in the literature, use the earliest published species name for the name of the complex. Enter just the name ("Hyla versicolor") and not additional words ("Hyla versicolor species complex" or "Hyla versicolor group"), for consistency and because iNaturalist is an international database; these words do not translate into other languages.
-Don't use compound names, such as Pantherophis alleghaniensis-spiloides, as there may be numerous species in the group
@albach ?
A guide is not a law. Do you see any harm in using that name for the complex?
@albach it's not a taxon name? Taxa on iNat are supposed to have taxon names, since they are taxa. Taxa without taxon names are not allowed, and the taxon name format for complexes is what I posted above, which has been determined by staff. We do not allow taxa that do not exist, because they do not exist.
If you don't edit it I will swap it into a properly formatted name, since the taxon in its current state is not acceptable. If you would like, you can give the complex a common name that reflects its subordinate species, but the scientific name needs to be in the format described above.
Also, on iNat, guidelines are final. Breaking the community guidelines, for example, can result in permanent suspension. Obviously this is no where near that level of seriousness, but staff prefer to use the term "guidelines" over "rules" or "law."
It is a taxon name, which I gave to the group (and will soon show up in a proper scientific publication). It is a taxon, because it is a monophyletic lineage. If staff insists that a taxon should have a different format than used in a scientific publication, that is fine with me. They (or you) should change it.
The odd thing in inaturalist is that they have the rank of complex because complexes in plants are not scientific names. They are not ruled by the Code of Nomenclature. So, you can make up any name and call it a complex. For me, a complex name is the name for a group of species, difficult to distinguish and helping amateurs to learn about closely related species. So, if a complex has just one species name it, amateurs may be misled in reducing it to the one species it is name after.
Suggestion to change the guidelines just sent to the inaturalist administration
I think there's substantial confusion over what a taxon is on iNaturalist, especially for taxonomists and botanists. A taxon, on iNat, is not as fluid of a concept as outside of our site in literature. iNat taxa are standardized, identifiable entities assigned a unique number. Our guidelines dictate what can exist as an iNaturalist taxon, and what does not follow our standardized system cannot be an iNaturalist taxon, barring few strictly necessary exceptions.
Strictly speaking, the Code does not apply to iNat, except indirectly through names sourced from Plants of the World Online. We largely align with the conventions of the Code, but not because we follow the Code itself, but because we follow POWO which follows the Code. Standard rules for iNat taxon names are to create consistency in name formatting.
@albach the taxon names of complexes on iNat should be limited to just one subordinate species (Complex Veronica hederifolia, for example).