18218
Reporter: kylecopas
Assignee: mdoering
Type: Feedback
Summary: Species holotype not matching to NUB
Resolution: WontFix
Status: Closed
Created: 2016-02-08 12:30:30.149
Updated: 2016-02-08 15:17:24.507
Resolved: 2016-02-08 15:14:55.76
Description: Just tweeted on a new dataset, highlighting the presence of a holotype. Little did I know, that occurrence doesn't resolve to the species (Hyolithes rhenanus) but only to the genus Hyolithes.
@rdmpage helpfully pointed out that this was one of the "INTERPRETATION ISSUES” issues, "Taxon match higher rank”. Verbatim tab (http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/1230509132/verbatim) notes that it’s actually "Hyolithes rhenanus Mauz 1933”.]]>
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2016-02-08 15:14:39.7
Updated: 2016-02-08 15:14:39.7
That's correct Kyle and expected behavior.
This will slightly change when the new backbone assembling code goes into production and we can update the backbone more frequently. But even then only when we actually have that new name in some checklist it will appear, not if its just in occurrences.
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Comment: [~kylecopas] if there is a prominent new species you need to write about please let us know in advance and we can then add it to the backbone patchlist so it gets incorporated into the next backbone which we aim to rebuild monthly at least soon.
Created: 2016-02-08 15:16:13.998
Updated: 2016-02-08 15:16:13.998
Author: kylecopas
Created: 2016-02-08 15:17:24.507
Updated: 2016-02-08 15:17:24.507
Understood, Markus—thanks.
Just wanted to flag it in the event that any specific instance was more useful than others!