Taxonomic Swap 103405
(Guardado el 08/01/2022)
|
|
reemplazar con |
|
Comentarios
For sure !
Other problem : if this species is included within Hemionitis, then related ones (hispanica, tinaei, maderensie, etc.), should be also...
Yes, I think this would be a very bad idea. It's not just hispanica, etc., that would need to be put into Hemionitis, but all cheilanthoids (which is what POWO does)--Pellaea, Pentagramma, Cheilanthes, Notholaena, Adiantopsis, Doryopteris, etc etc -- they would all have to be Hemionitis. In this situation, and in others, POWO is greatly out of step with the bulk of the pteridological community (which is why ferns on iNat don't follow POWO in general). @choess will better understand the situation.
Hemionitis sensu POWO would contain 450 species. I would prefer the current taxonomic concept with smaller generic. units.
I am sorry about the taxon swap. I thought POWO was generally up to date in terms of fern taxonomy. How can I revert the change?
I am not sure that we can undo the swap. Maybe yourself ? But I don't know how... (but at least, it will be easy to do the exact reverse swap)
@bouteloua any idea ?
Only staff can reverse taxon changes. You can reach them at help@inaturalist.org
thanks
@choess Chris, this unfortunate change, again provoked by "POWO" should be undone to harmonize with a usable and logic concept.
I preferred a solution which blocked likewise taxon changes without the essential knowledge of the whole group and it's current taxonomy.
Again, as such alterations increased in numbers, i quitted to curate taxa a while ago, "too many cooks will spoil the meal = taxonomy" !
Agreed. Did anyone contact staff about rolling this back? If not, I could do a swap reversing it but that might be a little burdensome on the system.
I think nobody contacted them. @konstakal ?
I have already emailed the about this issue. You have to be a little more patient! Again, sorry for the inconvenience. Plant systematics is pure chaos; every database follows a different taxonomy, and this is something you do not ever encounter in animal taxonomy. I wonder why that is..
Maybe because :
for vertebrates, there are a lot of people deeply studying few animal species, that the debate reach consensus quickly and databases follow ;
for invertebrate, there a so few people studying a so much lot of species, that all databases follow the only study available once per decade or century ;
for plants, the situation is intermediate (more or less people for more or less species, depends on families and geography) and above all the frequent polyploidy really gives more complexity to the taxonomic issue !
Update: I got reply saying that I should mention @loarie and he can probably revert the change!
I have manually swapped this back.
thanks
oof
Is this swap indicative of an effort to merge all species in subfamily Cheilanthoideae into a single genus, Hemionitis? If so a lot of people are going to find it to be a major step backwards. I don’t believe this should proceed without a major discussion and broad agreement.