unique numbers for species

Markku Savela msa at BURP.TKV.ASDF.ORG
Thu Oct 11 23:32:48 CDT 2001


> Because as soon as someone splits the species into two, you have two taxa
> with identical identifier.  For example, what was once called Traill's
> Flycatcher is now Alder Flycatcher and Willow Flycatcher.

This is a problem. However, centralized numbering would have exactly
the same problem.

The split off taxa would have a new "binonomial id" or a new
registered number, but all the older records (and large amount of
newer ones too) would be bound to the clumped species group.

And there may be another guy who splits the same species in different
way.

I can only throw in an idea of possible solution:

 - when a species is split, in addition to giving the ids (= names) to
   the new species, the splitter also assign a new unique alias id to
   the original species, for example

   when "Some species Author, 1902" is slit by Newauthor in 2001 into
   two, then perhaps the new tag would be like

        "Some species Author, 1902:Newauthor, 2001
        "Some newspecies NewAuthor, 2001"

 - and those, who record information and recognize the split, would
   use those. If someone further splits original remaining section, I
   don't think you nee "Some species Author, 1902:Newauthor, 2001:Someone,
   2002". Instead, I think plain "Some species Author, 1902:Someone,
   2002" is enough.

This is getting convoluted, but perhaps...

regards,
--
Markku Savela <Markku.Savela at iki.fi>




More information about the Taxacom mailing list