[Taxacom] Catalogue of Life, EoL, etc.
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Tue Sep 28 20:32:36 CDT 2010
Yes, but it isn't quite that simple - CoL effectively accepts responsibility for
errors (rather than just being able to pass the blame to the data provider), by
making sweet sounding grand statements like 'Species 2000 and ITIS
teams PEER REVIEW databases, select appropriate sectors and integrate the
sectors into a single coherent catalogue with a single hierarchical
classification' [my capitals]
(http://www.catalogueoflife.org/annual-checklist/2010/info/about). My problem is
not with the errors per se (though there are actually "quite a few"), but with
an alleged peer review process which appears to me like a black phantom in the
dead of night (i.e. I know YOU can't see it, but it really is there, really,
really ...) !
From: "Tony.Rees at csiro.au" <Tony.Rees at csiro.au>
To: stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Sent: Wed, 29 September, 2010 2:20:43 PM
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Catalogue of Life, EoL, etc.
If you understand the data flow you will realise where the error originates,
i.e. EoL uses that Cat. of Life for its taxonomic authority file / data
backbone, CoL is a compilation of numerous (70+) specialist contributors, so
errors in any of the latter will be propagated up the chain unless someone spots
them (as you have done) - then the appropriate action is to inform the source
database (in this case the BioSystematic Database of World Diptera,
http://www.diptera.org/ ) who will no doubt be pleased to be alerted to it so
that it can be corrected.
From their site:
"It is a tremendous undertaking to continuously maintain, update, and refine our
Most entries are still at a suboptimal quality assurance level, new records are
continuously published, and Diptera taxonomy changes as our knowledge grows.
We are strongly dependent on your help, and we are grateful for any piece of
information you are able to contribute.
Just pass a note to one of us (Contact Us) if you note errors, omissions, or
So before you take further issue with CoL and its data product users, alert the
originators of the data, and those products will gradually improve. Also I
believe that it is unreasonable to expect every large data compilation to be
100.00% correct, most are best efforts by individuals, often working over and
above their paid jobs, and the odd error can obviously creep in. You will
certainly find errors and inconsistencies in my data compilations too, but
hopefully not too many and again, I am happy to be notified of them so they can
be fixed when I next have a moment.
(Actually I have fixed a swag of these recently so my next product release will
definitely be "cleaner" than before).
There are of course errors in the published literature too, as well as in
abstracting services and their products, but again hopefully not too many.
Tony Rees, Hobart
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 September 2010 10:39 AM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: [Taxacom] Catalogue of Life, EoL, etc.
> wondering how CoL and EoL managed to put one species of mosquito into
> Tabanidae (totally unrelated)!!!
> wake up!
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
More information about the Taxacom