dwc-qa
dwc-qa copied to clipboard
tdwg
scientificName for taxa not found
A user submitted this information via the Darwin Core Hour webform: Timestamp: 11/21/2017 16:25:25 Please provide a topic of interest: If on my specimen I have a scientific name i cannot find in any APG, should I then stop to the upper level (e.g. genus) or can I keep the specific epithet as is (as may be the taxon is under description but not recorded yet? couldn't it be already suggesting that we have more diversity in the taxon? Are you capable of and interested in participating: No Who else would you recommend to participate in the presentation: TDWG What resources can you point to: Your name: Jaona RANAIVO Your email: [email protected] Your GitHub username:
If it is an older name, you could try searching the Biodiversity Heritage Library https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/
I list the name in full but record that I was unable to find it in any literature and that it is a "possible MS name". You never know when some old correspondence about that name might appear!
Hello Jaona, could you please tell us how old the specimen is (or if it's an observation record, the date)? Could you also please share the name in question?
If it's a newer specimen, then the name could just be so new it's not yet in the APG. If it's an old specimen, it would be good to share the original name so that it doesn't get lost. @tucotuco is this where one would use Identification History? where to capture the exact string, even though it's not in a current authority file? Then the original string could be in the Identification History, but the current name that would go into dwc:scientificName could be the genus...
@debpaul One could capture that information in the previousIdentifications field, so as not to lose it in the abyss of extensions, which do not get indexed and are not visible in the portals.
thanks @tucotuco. Once more people use the extensions, I think they will be indexed (and so, not lost in the abyss...). In this use case, you recommend dwc:previousIdentifications. What would go in dwc:scientificName?
The same thing could go into scientificName is there has not been a change, it will end up in the verbatim version of the scientificName, while the interpreted values will go into scientificName, at least in the case of GBIF.
We need to add that last bit, to our answer. At least now, at GBIF, the data provider can tell (beforehand) what their own provided names will be changed to once uploaded to GBIF.