Hadrinae. This
happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the
output taxa.
Review identifications of Figuladra 554425
Taxonomic Split 112778
(Committed on 2022-08-12)
|
|
split into |
|
Comments
The ones in blue should be going up to Hadrinae not to Figuladra as they are all in the overlap zone where Euryladra and Figuladra are both possible (or alternatively the Brigaladra/Figuladra overlap zone). The paper doesn't include a map for Figuladra but gives the following:
Euryladra - "From Tweed River, NE NSW to Rockhampton, SEQ and
inland as far west as Carnarvon NP, SCQ; open woodland
and dry vine thicket living under rocks and logs"
Figuladra - "Eastern Queensland from Maryborough to St Helen’s Beach,
on off-lying islands from the South Cumberland Island group
to Fraser Island, and west to the Great Dividing Range. "
This means anything between Maryborough and Rockhampton could be either Euryladra or Figuladra unless it has distinguishing features that make it clearly one or the other. South of Maryborough it should only be Euryladra mattea, except for the sole introduced specimen record. The ones coming out as Euryladra north of Maryborough are all fine as they have been IDd as mattea to species, meaning the uncertainty applying to genus-level Figuladra IDs does not affect them.
@kevinbonham The colors represent current observations, not what they will be after the swap. See this request for that functionality:
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/show-atlases-on-taxon-changes/10357
If you click the "Atlased" button you can see the ranges I added. Feel free to edit those. I believe all the current Figuladra observations will get bumped to Hadrinae.
Ah earlier in the paper, it says
Figuladra s.s. is the only clade among these four genera that is restricted to an area east of the Great Dividing Range. This genus is distributed in nearcoastal dry vine thickets with nine species now distributed from north of the Mary River, Gympie, SEQ to slightly south of the O’Connell River, south of Proserpine, MEQ (Stanisic et al. 2010).
Which is correct? There would be a few Figuladra observations south of Maryborough that are either bumped to Hadrinae or changed to Euryladra, depending on how we atlas them.
Ah I didn't notice there were two slightly different range descriptions; the paper doesn't include a map for Figuladra so I suggest using whichever is broader. Look fine to me.
@kevinbonham OK I committed. You can ID potentially affected observations here:
https://www.inaturalist.org/identifications?current=any&taxon_id=554425
Let me know if there are any issues.
Thanks, all fine except for https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104693360 which actually is a Figuladra (it got introduced into the Euryladra range).
...which has been fixed by original identifier re-IDing it as Figuladra as well so all is good.
@kevinbonham How does this look? Check that each atlas looks right—I added places according to Stanisic et al. (2022) but you said the dividing line was at Maryborough. Euryladra is being weird though:
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/places-spontaneously-removed-from-atlas/34060