Taxon swap aaaaaa 48px Taxonomic Swap 31022 (Committed on 2018-03-09)

Yes
Added by rfoster on March 09, 2018 12:47 | Committed by rfoster on March 09, 2018
replaced with

Comments

Thumb

what's the source? (curious)

Posted by bouteloua over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

Primary source or secondary? Secondary is IPNI which I thought I'd put in

Posted by rfoster over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

@rfoster this needs a little better documentation as @ryancooke apparently disagrees with it.

Posted by choess over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

@choess Not sure what I need to add. I have supplied the source which is IPNI, a recognised authority for iNat and the IPNI entry has the primary reference, of course. The change was made in response to a flag requesting it which, on investigation, seems warranted.
I cannot find the comment/flag by @ryancooke - what is the basis of the objection?

Posted by rfoster over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

USDA PLANTS database is still referencing Pleopeltis polypodioides (L.) Andrews & Windham ssp. michauxiana (Weath.) Andrews & Windham (https://plants.usda.gov/core/profile?symbol=PLPOM). I'm not sure they are the arbiter of global identification but it would seem that, since it is a North American species, until they have endorsed the change, it's premature to change it here.

Posted by norm_shea over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

@norm_shea - yes, I may have jumped the gun on this one. You're right, the regional floras are yet to adopt the change. I don't think there is a problem reversing it, for the time being, other than upsetting the user who requested the change. I think it's probably smart to consult the big guns on this, first - @whiteoak is this change likely to be adopted by in the Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States anytime soon? If not then, I agree, we should reverse the change. @bouteloua you are a font of wisdom - any thoughts?

Posted by rfoster over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

To my understanding, IPNI isn't a taxonomic authority for iNat. It's just a list of names.
USDA is not one of our taxonomic authorities either.
Weakley 2015 is the relevant authority for this taxon: a vascular plant occurring in the southeast US, but NOT in New England, California, or Canada.
https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#policies
[side note, when a taxon is present in overlapping regions and they disagree on names, The Plant List is the tiebreaker.]

Weakley 2015 does accept Pleopeltis michauxiana as a valid taxon.

"Pleopeltis michauxiana (Weatherby) Hickey & Sprunt, Resurrection Fern, Scaly Polypody. On tree limbs and trunks (especially when leaning) and on rocks. Jun-Oct. P. michauxiana ranges from se. MD, IL, MO, and se. KS, south to s. FL and TX; also in Mexico and Guatemala. Although traditionally treated as a variety of P. polypodioides, recent studies suggest that this taxon warrants specific status (Sprunt 2010; Sprunt et al. 2011; Vincent & Hickey 2014). P. polypodioides (in the strictsense) is essentially Caribbean in distribution: in s. FL, the West Indies, Central America, and n. South America. Six additional taxa in the complex are tropical in Mexico, Central America, South America, and Africa. [= Y; = Pleopeltis polypodioides (Linnaeus) E.G. Andrews & Windham var. michauxiana (Weatherby) E.G. Andrews & Windham – Ar, FNA, K2, Va, Z; < Pleopeltis polypodioides – Il; < Polypodium polypodioides (Linnaeus) Watt – RAB; = Polypodium polypodioides (Linnaeus) Watt var. michauxianum Weatherby – C, F, G, W, WV; < Marginaria polypodioides (Linnaeus) Tidestrøm – S; = Pleopeltis polypodioides ssp. michauxiana – Va, nomen nudum] "

Following iNat's Curator Guide Policy for vascular plant names of taxa occurring in the US, sounds like this taxon swap should stay in place.
I edited the taxon change to add Weakley as the source.

Posted by bouteloua over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

Excellent, thanks for sorting that out so comprehensively!

Posted by rfoster over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

I do think this is well warranted based on most recent literature.

Posted by whiteoak over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

This still leaves the situation in a pretty big mess. (Part of the problem is that Sprunt & Hickey have never actually published the material from her dissertation--of all the segregates of P. pleopeltis sensu lato, only P. michauxiana has a validly published name at species level at present, because Hickey validated it for a list of Bermuda flora in 2014. All the others are still varieties or subspecies of P. polypodioides.)

Because people have not generally been IDing P. polypodioides to the varietal level, we now have 626 observations of P. michauxiana which are identified as P. polypodioides. I think the correct thing to do is a taxon split, replacing the old P. polypodioides with P. michauxiana and a new P. polypodioides which represents everything else (and will have to be split in the future when Sprunt & Hickey validate their new combinations). I would rather not reverse swaps like this that I expect to be upheld in the future, but IMO this was a bit premature.

Posted by choess over 2 years ago (Flag)
Thumb

I'm not sure how this is handled behind the scenes in iNat but what @choess suggests would seem judicious. Otherwise, it would make it appear that there has been a significant range expansion of P. polypodioides into the southeastern US.

Posted by norm_shea over 2 years ago (Flag)

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments