Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Critical Critical
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: Checklistbank
    • Labels:
    • Environment:
    • Sprint:
      Tiny 1

      Description

      IUCN and CoL both settle around 1500 accepted species while our backbone exposes > 12.000 accepted species. For example the genus Weingartia in GBIF with some hundred species (from IPNI) is completely synonymised in IUCN

        Gliffy Diagrams

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Markus Döring added a comment -

          No. But I just discovered that the backbone I am looking at isnt using the basionym detection feature. I am rebuilding a new one tonight, let's see how that changes figures

          Show
          Markus Döring added a comment - No. But I just discovered that the backbone I am looking at isnt using the basionym detection feature. I am rebuilding a new one tonight, let's see how that changes figures
          Hide
          Markus Döring added a comment -

          And Ive created a TPL dwc archive for WFO: https://github.com/worldflora/tpl
          But I was told its not for public or GBIF use

          Show
          Markus Döring added a comment - And Ive created a TPL dwc archive for WFO: https://github.com/worldflora/tpl But I was told its not for public or GBIF use
          Hide
          Markus Döring added a comment -

          TPL has similar stats to ours if you consider unassed as doubtful or accepted:
          http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/browse/A/Cactaceae/

          • Accepted 2,233 17.0%
          • Synonym 5,422 41.2%
          • Unplaced 1 0.0%
          • Unassessed 5,504 41.8%
          Show
          Markus Döring added a comment - TPL has similar stats to ours if you consider unassed as doubtful or accepted: http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/browse/A/Cactaceae/ Accepted 2,233 17.0% Synonym 5,422 41.2% Unplaced 1 0.0% Unassessed 5,504 41.8%
          Hide
          Roderic D. M. Page added a comment -

          Who told you "its not for public or GBIF use"? My patience with people not sharing data is wearing thin...

          Show
          Roderic D. M. Page added a comment - Who told you "its not for public or GBIF use"? My patience with people not sharing data is wearing thin...
          Hide
          Roderic D. M. Page added a comment -

          Besides the terms of use specifically allow derivative works (I'm sure we've had a similar discussion before), and I'd argue a Darwin Core Archive is derivative, so why don't we just do it...

          If use of that particular archive is a problem, I can create one. I've been meaning to do so for a while, and it could be made highly "derived" by adding 200,000-300,000 literature links I've been adding to IPNI.

          Show
          Roderic D. M. Page added a comment - Besides the terms of use specifically allow derivative works (I'm sure we've had a similar discussion before), and I'd argue a Darwin Core Archive is derivative, so why don't we just do it... If use of that particular archive is a problem, I can create one. I've been meaning to do so for a while, and it could be made highly "derived" by adding 200,000-300,000 literature links I've been adding to IPNI.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              Markus Döring
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:

                Agile