Flagger Content Author Content Reason Flag Created Resolved by Resolution
pdabell loarie narrowleaf wild leek (Allium burdickii)

the link to the record on Nature Serve Explorer is broken and has been updated.

Wed, 06 Mar 2024 06:45:43 PM UTC kitty12

Updated

Comments

The provided link to the record on NatureServe Explorer for Allium burdickii is broken/outdated and redirected here. The updated one for the taxon is here.

Posted by pdabell 3 months ago

Also opened obscuration since threats do not appear to include collection/ harvesting.

Posted by kitty12 3 months ago

@kitty12 , your comment applies to an earlier flag of mine and I think for either Complex Allium tricoccum or A. tricoccum. An update to the conservation status (Resolution: "Updated conservation status") is not the issue of this one, so please keep it open until it is resolved.

Posted by pdabell 3 months ago

Okay, but I have in fact updated the links to the new NatureServe Explorer page.

Posted by kitty12 3 months ago

Allium burdickii/tricoccum are the prime examples I use to point out how much of an impact overcollection can have on wild populations of desirable plants. I've re-obscured them. Please do not open them again.

A. burdickii is closely allied to A. tricoccum, any site listing collection threats to one should also apply to the other.
https://unitedplantsavers.org/species-at-risk-list/ramps-allium-tricoccum/
https://extension.illinois.edu/blogs/garden-scoop/2020-04-12-wild-ramps

Posted by rynxs 3 months ago

@kitty12 , at the time of my adding this commemt, the link still points to https://explorer.natureserve.org/search?sn=Allium%20burdickii and is redirected to https://explorer.natureserve.org/Search#q . The new one is https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701/Allium_tricoccum_var_burdickii . If NatureServe doesn't include the accepted name in the URL and only their Unique Identifier, this problem could be resolved automatically in the future if the accepted name again changes since the UI is constant.

Posted by pdabell 3 months ago

@rynxs and @kitty12 , this flag has nothing to do with obscuration of obs in the taxon. Although I do agree with doing so, and with obs in Complex Allium tricoccum. The flag I opened at the end of January that is relevant to this is at https://inaturalist.ca/flags/647387 .

Posted by pdabell 3 months ago

@kitty12 , I see in the duration history that the change has been made. That is good. Thank you. I am used to seeing changes on iNat happen in real-time, and I didn't realize that the changes will become active later. Until looking at that history, I also didn't realize the relevance of your comment about obscuration because it seemed related to other flags I made in this taxon, the Complex and at A. tricoccum at the end of January and which have yet to be resolved. @rynxs , thank you for re-obscurring the changes. Opening the location coordinates on A. burdickii is quite the opposite of what I was requesting!

Posted by pdabell 3 months ago

No worries @pdabell and @rynxs When a flag is raised related to conservation stutus, I also take a look at the obscuration status to make sure that it isn't a relic of when obscuration was automatically added (in past iterations of iNaturalist). We take a more focused approach now - favouring open observations where possible. I was not aware of the close relationship/ potential for confusion between these related species. I took the threats description at face value, but I can see how this is a special case. You might wish to add a note to each place indicating why you believe that obscuration is appropriate, otherwise the next conservation status flag may result in further unwanted changes.

Posted by kitty12 3 months ago

@kitty12 , any update on this flag?

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

Does anything further need to be done? I have lost track, sadly.

Posted by kitty12 about 1 month ago

@kitty12 , yes, since nothing has been done yet, the initial comment of mine is still equally relevant. Reading just it and not the other ones will put you back on track. The same is applicable for similar flags I made on the same date on A. tricoccum var. tricoccum and Complex Allium tricoccum. I will mention you in a comment on the flag for each.

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

All NatureServe/ NatureServe Explorer links from the Status page currently open to: https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701/Allium_tricoccum_var_burdickii I am at a loss what needs to be further updated.

Posted by kitty12 about 1 month ago

@kitty12 , I am referring to the NatureServe Explorer 2.0 link under More Info at the About tab, which does not work since it points to https://explorer.natureserve.org/search?sn=Allium%20burdickii .

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

@kitty12 , the NatureServe Explorer 2.0 link now points to this flag. Unless that was just a simple mistake when making the update, perhaps you could explain the rationale. I was only bringing attention to the change to the link on NatureServe Explorer (the version number, "2.0," appears to have been dropped at some point) and thought that updating the link would be helpful to other iNat users and others that click on it.

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

@kitty12 , the NatureServe Explorer 2.0 link for this taxon now points to this flag. Unless that was just a simple mistake when making the update, perhaps you could explain the rationale. I was only bringing attention to the change to the link on NatureServe Explorer (the version number, "2.0," appears to have been dropped at some point) and thought that updating the link would be helpful to other iNat users and others that click on it.

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

@kitty12 , one way to possibly simplify the link to the treatment of A. burdickii as a variety of A. tricoccum sensu lato so that it remains the same if/when (hopefully "when") on NS Explorer NS's accepted once again becomes A. burdickii would be to drop "Allium_tricoccum_var_burdickii" from the link's URL since the now-accepted variety and previously-accepted species on NS Explorer share the same NatureServe Unique Identifier, ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701, and therefore the same URL up to that point, which is https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701/ and was https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701/Allium_burdickii before the change to the current one. If the link had been that URL before instead of https://explorer.natureserve.org/search?sn=Allium%20burdickii , I would not have added this this flag since it would not have been necessary.

This, of course, can't be done (or so I think) for the similar NS Explorer links at Complex A. tricoccum (A. tricoccum sensu lato) and A. tricoccum (A. tricoccum sensu stricto), but the links for each can, and, in my opinion, should, still be updated (see the similar flags at those taxons).

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

All, I have restored the NatureServe Explorer 2.0 taxon link to its original generic form, so that it will again work for all iNat species that NatureServe also accepts.

The reason it is not working for Allium burdickii is that NatureServe still accepts Allium tricoccum var. burdickii for that taxon. On their failed-search page they state that

Results include only full species with accepted taxonomy and standard ecosystems. See Classification tab for more options.

This is a NatureServe thing and nothing we can control. External web sites change their functionality from time to time. So if you click on the NatureServe link and don't get a search result, you will then have to continue on the NatureServe Explorer page to find the taxon you are looking for. It's the best we can do without maintaining tens of thousands of individual links for each species on iNaturalist.

As now restored, note that if you follow the NatureServe Explorer 2.0 link from the Allium tricoccum page (https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/55634-Allium-tricoccum), you will get NatureServe's Allium tricoccum page, where you can then scroll down to a link for Allium tricoccum var. burdickii.

Posted by jdmore about 1 month ago

@jdmore , on 2024/03/02 the accepted scientific names for NatureServe Unique Identifiers ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701 and ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.138691 were changed from Allium burdickii and A. tricoccum in the "narrow concept" to A. tricoccum var. burdickii and A. tricoccum var. tricoccum, and the accepted name for ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.794001, which had also been A. tricoccum, but in the "broad concept" (sensu lato) remained unchanged. The revised treatment with the inclusion of A. tricoccum sensu lato, ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.794001, was confusing but some of its partner conservation data centers treat it in the narrow sense as a variety of A. tricoccum sensu lato. I interpret these changes as an effort to try to represent NS's partner CDCs' different treatments of the inconsistent taxonomy consistently. Correcting the iNat link for A. burdickii, and for A. tricoccum--still incorrectly pointing to A. tricoccum sensu lato, ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.794001 would be helpful.

If the scientific names are omitted in the links (as mentioned in an above comment for the taxonomy on NS Explorer of ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701) and the taxonomy changes again back to recognizing A. burdickii and A. tricoccum and the record for A. tricoccum sensu lato is dropped, making such a change again won't be necessary. Until, of course, more taxa are possibly added (see Taxonomic Comments for the record for A. tricoccum var. burdickii.

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

@pdabell I understand the taxonomic differences, and agree that it would be helpful if the NatureServe search protocol handled synonyms and re-directed them toward the equivalent taxa in NatureServe. Unfortunately, as noted above, the NatureServe Explorer search protocol is not that "smart." It only works when NatureServe and iNaturalist taxonomy matches, and only at the species level. That is not something that we can change from the iNaturalist side of things. So unfortunately the NatureServe Explorer 2.0 link is not going to work when iNat and NS taxonomy differs, unless and until NS makes their search protocol more flexible.

tl;dr - When the link from iNat executes, it sends a search to NS in the format

https://explorer.natureserve.org/search?sn=[Genus] [species]

where [Genus] and [species] are replaced by whatever those names are on the iNat taxon page where the link is clicked. If those names don't have a match on the NatureServe end in their accepted taxonomy (either s.s. or s.l.), NatureServe will show their "failed search" page (https://explorer.natureserve.org/Search#q). From there, one just needs to try a different search on the NatureServe page using their accepted taxonomy.

Posted by jdmore about 1 month ago

I saw your added note after posting the above:

If the scientific names are omitted in the links (as mentioned in an above comment for the taxonomy on NS Explorer of ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.155701) and the taxonomy changes again back to recognizing A. burdickii and A. tricoccum and the record for A. tricoccum sensu lato is dropped, making such a change again won't be necessary.

Unfortunately iNaturalist has no way of knowing NatureServe's unique identifier for each taxon name and circumscription. One could manually look them up for each of the tens of thousands of species involved, and manually create a unique link on each iNat taxon page, but that is a labor-prohibitive project for iNaturalist.

So the only alternative is to use the generic search link described in my previous post, which iNat automatically customizes for each taxon page, knowing that it won't always find a corresponding NatureServe Explorer result.

Posted by jdmore about 1 month ago

Another note: Wikipedia does know unique taxon identifiers for NatureServe and many other reference sites. If iNaturalist finds a Wikipedia page for a taxon, it is displayed on the left-hand side of the same "About" tab on the taxon page. If you scroll all the way to the bottom of the Wikipedia information, you will find all of the Taxon Identifiers that Wikipedia knows about, in clickable form so that you can go straight to the corresponding page on NatureServe or wherever.

Posted by jdmore about 1 month ago

@jdmore , thank you for those helpful comments. I understand your point about how "labor-prohibitive" it would be to manually update every taxon (even if just the ones with records on NatureServe). It is probably simpler for NS to revise its search parameters (I.e. including results for searches of synonyms.

The Wikipedia article, like many of them, is a good springboard to more reliable information, such as the link to NS Explorer for Allium burdickii. But it's links of course, like that one, need occasional updating. If someone else doesn't get to doing that first, perhaps I will. But there's a lot in that article that could use some revising.

Thanks again for your helpful comments.

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

@jdmore , when looking at the NatureServe Explorer search page, I noticed that Allium burdickii can be queried and show Allium tricoccum var. burdickii in the search result, but there is no URL to add as a link to it or any of the other custom searches at https://explorer.natureserve.org/Search. There instead are 'yes/no,' 'on/off' slide icons and the one that results in the variety from a search of Allium burdickii is, "Include subspecies, varieties, and populations" under the "Classification" subheading. By default, the slide is set to 'off' and must be manually moved to 'on.' It doesn't solve the problem; NS Explorer would have to move it to 'on' by default or make it possible to link to directly through a unique URL.

Posted by pdabell about 1 month ago

Yes, it's unfortunate that NatureServe (and a few other similar reference sites) have decreased the functionality of their URL searches by taxon name over time. This makes it harder for other sites (like iNaturalist) to drive more traffic to their web pages.

Posted by jdmore about 1 month ago

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments