Oligochaeta (animal) linked to Oligochaeta (plant genus)
18381
Reporter: rdmpage
Assignee: jlegind
Type: Feedback
Summary: Oligochaeta (animal) linked to Oligochaeta (plant genus)
Description: Most of the records for the plant genus _Oligochaeta_ (A.P. de Candolle) K.H.E. Koch, 1843 http://www.gbif.org/species/5401803 are for worms (oligochaetes). Looks like these occurrences simply have scientificName as "Oligochaeta" with no other information (e.g., no information on whether it's an animal or a plant).
Priority: Unassessed
Status: InProgress
Created: 2016-04-07 14:13:48.685
Updated: 2016-10-28 16:08:04.402
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2016-04-07 17:45:03.187
Updated: 2016-04-07 17:45:03.187
Unfortunately the class is not in Catalogue of Life:
http://www.catalogueoflife.org/col/search/all/key/Oligochaeta/fossil/0/match/1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligochaeta
There are quite a few cases like this causing problems for GBIF occurrences. Vertebrata, Heteropoda - all being a genus but also an entirely different, usually higher taxon. Usually in a different kingdom.
Often these higher taxa are not included in the backbone, so even for occurrences with a higher classification we interpret them wrongly.
And often the reason why we do not include them in the backbone is that the are non Linnean ranks like subclass or superfamily, see POR-2781
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2016-04-07 17:54:11.315
Updated: 2016-04-07 17:54:11.315
I will add the class Oligochaeta as a synonym of the annelids class Clitellata in our patch list.
CoL uses Clitellata as the only other phylum in Annelida next to Polychaeta. It also includes the orders Haplotaxida, Lumbriculida & Moniligastrida which are orders of Oligochaeta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitellata
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligochaeta
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2016-04-14 15:04:20.865
Updated: 2016-04-14 15:05:53.432
Oligochaeta without ranks gets you the plant genus:
http://api.gbif-uat.org/v1/species/match?verbose=true&name=Oligochaeta
With rank given you can get to the worm class now:
http://api.gbif-uat.org/v1/species/match?verbose=true&name=Oligochaeta&rank=CLASS
Also close ranks like SUBCLASS or PHYLUM work:
http://api.gbif-uat.org/v1/species/match?verbose=true&name=Oligochaeta&rank=SUBCLASS
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Comment: [~jlegind@gbif.org], [~kbraak@gbif.org] is this something for the content team to follow up on? It would be great if the publishers of these doubtful records would be contacted and they would add a kingdom or other higher classification if they could.
Created: 2016-10-24 16:26:02.516
Updated: 2016-10-24 16:26:02.516
Author: kbraak@gbif.org
Created: 2016-10-24 17:32:35.745
Updated: 2016-10-24 17:32:35.745
Thanks Markus.
How about [~jlegind@gbif.org] and I write to the publishers of the invertebrates datasets below that contain doubtful records and ask them to add a kingdom or other higher classification?
Scottish Environment Protection Agency - River macroinvertebrate data ... (6,194 doubtful records)
dataset_key=98af357b-541e-4f16-b35c-8ca68767be99
Published by: UK National Biodiversity Network: http://www.gbif.org/publisher/07f617d0-c688-11d8-bf62-b8a03c50a862
Macroinvertebrate abunda… (299 doubtful records)
dataset_key=ece4ea69-9ec5-4773-a5dc-7a99b245e415
Published by PANGAEA: http://www.gbif.org/publisher/d5778510-eb28-11da-8629-b8a03c50a862
Invertebrates Collection… (166 doubtful records)
dataset_key=56aa0680-0c60-11dd-84cd-b8a03c50a862
Published by GBIF-Sweden: http://www.gbif.org/publisher/4c415e40-1e21-11de-9e40-a0d6ecebb8bf
Clitellata - SMF (102 doubtful records)
dataset_key=7f4020e2-1387-11e2-bb2e-00145eb45e9a
Published by Senckenberg: http://www.gbif.org/publisher/c76cf030-2a95-11da-9cc1-b8a03c50a862
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Comment: Thanks Kyle, that would be good!
Created: 2016-10-24 22:41:05.712
Updated: 2016-10-24 22:41:05.712
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2016-10-24 22:49:44.974
Updated: 2016-10-24 22:49:44.974
Maybe you could also get in touch with these which seem to have worms only and missing classifications:
EPA'S EMAP Database (1732 records)
http://www.gbif.org/dataset/838bb5ee-f762-11e1-a439-00145eb45e9a
Artdata (1359 records)
http://www.gbif.org/dataset/38b4c89f-584c-41bb-bd8f-cd1def33e92f
Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre - Other datasets (1036 records)
http://www.gbif.org/dataset/492d63a8-4978-4bc7-acd8-7d0e3ac0e744
Here are all occurrence datasets: http://www.gbif.org/species/5401803/datasets?type=OCCURRENCE
When I see that long list of datasets I think we should flag all records that do not provide any classification at all.
[~cgendreau], how about we add missing classification to the new (occurrence) validator?