Pteraeolidia. Esto
ocurre cuando no podemos asignar automáticamente una identificación a uno de los
taxa de salida.
Revisar identificaciones de Pteraeolidia ianthina 48753
Taxonomic Split 24938
(Guardado el 06/09/2017)
|
|
dividido en |
|
Comentarios
Yes, that's a good idea.
One other thing to note: MarineSpecies.org, iNat's authority in this area, does support this split. I referenced the paper because it gives clearer range information than the website does.
Phew! At least it looks like my P. ianthina won't change. They are all in NSW (in fact, in the surveyed sites) from memory.
So, ummmm.... do we have to do anything?
The automatic change of identification by iNat did not work very well in this case, so many of the observations of these reverted to genus. The problem is that the range atlas only supports countries, which are defined by their shorelines. If the observation is offshore, it usually doesn't fall within any of the specified countries, so iNat changes the ID to the common ancestor of genus.
They really need to expand the outlines of the countries to include their EEZs for it to work for marine creatures.
To answer your question, it's worth taking a quick look at your observations of these nudibranchs. If any of them now show just the genus rather than the correct species in the community ID, then re-identify them.
Not entirely sure what happened here. If I ask this change to say what the output taxon should be for http://www.inaturalist.org/observations/1134, it says P. semperi, which seems right. Is there a chance the atlas or the place boundary changed after this was committed?
This looks good to me based on a cursory look at the paper, but you should activate the atlases before committing this swap. That should have the effect of moving all obs of the old P. ianthina from NSW to the new P. ianthina sensu stricto, and everything else to P. semperi. @jpsilva, you might want to have a look at this too before Mark commits.