Issue 18479
Incorrect synonymy when recombination authors are missing
18479
Reporter: rdmpage
Assignee: mdoering
Type: Bug
Summary: Incorrect synonymy when recombination authors are missing
Priority: Critical
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Closed
Created: 2016-05-18 14:11:00.948
Updated: 2016-07-13 22:55:28.002
Resolved: 2016-07-13 22:55:27.936
Description: As far as I can work out there is an error in the synonymy of _Lasioglossum micheneri_ (Moure, 1956) http://www.gbif.org/species/1354510
GBIF lists two synonyms:
_Chloralictus micheneri_ Moure, 1956
_Homalictus micheneri_ Pauly, 1986
These are two very different species. _Chloralictus micheneri_ Moure, 1956 is a Brazilian species described in Moure, J. S. (1956). Seis espécies novas de Chloralictus do sul do Brasil (Hymenopt.- Apoidea). Dusenia 7 (2): 107-117 (e.g., http://moure.cria.org.br/catalogue/catalogue/catalogue?id=18566 ) whereas _Homalictus micheneri_ Pauly, 1986 is from New Guinea http://repository.naturalis.nl/document/148844 "Holotype. — ♀, Nouvelle-Guinee: Korifeigu, 22 km SE.Goroka, 1500 m, l.v.1959 ( C D . Michener) (BBMH). Paratypes. — Nouvelle-Guinee: Amok, 165 m, 6.U960, 2 ♂ (T.C Maa) (BBMH).
I think part of the problem is that both names have ended up in _Lasioglossum_ which makes them homonyms, but this doesn't make them synonyms. I've not seen recent treatment of _Homalictus micheneri_ Pauly, 1986 since its original description, so not sure what people think about this name today, but GBIF's page isn't correct.]]>
Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2016-05-18 16:49:08.224
Updated: 2016-05-18 16:49:08.224
All the information comes from the CoL.
Homalictus micheneri Pauly, 1986 is regarded a synonym of Lasioglossum micheneri (Pauly, 1986)
http://www.gbif.org/species/110199371
Chloralictus micheneri Moure, 1956 a synonym of Lasioglossum micheneri (Moure, 1956)
http://www.gbif.org/species/110199373
It seems to me that the problem is an incorrect or rather incomplete author matching which ignores the original author and just uses the recombination author which in this case (like many if not most zoological names) is null and thus the same. This needs to be proved in the code, but I am almost certain.