[Taxacom] IRMNG is moving...

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Wed Jul 20 21:59:58 CDT 2016


I wonder if all those alleged homonyms have been verified for availability according to the Code? If a name is not available, then it cannot enter into homonymy.

Cheers, Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 21/7/16, Geoffrey Read <gread at actrix.gen.nz> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] IRMNG is moving...
 To: "Tony Rees" <tonyrees49 at gmail.com>
 Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu, "World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS)" <info at marinespecies.org>
 Received: Thursday, 21 July, 2016, 2:18 PM
 
 
 Hi
 Tony,
 
 Thanks for the
 comprehensive response (and for the reminder about
 Rod's
 version of NomZoo).  We can
 discuss the WoRMS presentation issues
 elsewhere (I do think initial search results
 should display a short
 hierarchy), but just
 wondering what you or WoRMS can do to continue your
 homonym lists, which presumably took quite a
 bit of work to make, and
 might be unique?
 
 http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/irmng/homonyms.htm
 
 Geoff
 
 On Thu, July 21, 2016 9:10 am, Tony Rees
 wrote:
 > Hello Geoff, and nice to hear
 from you (although despite being nearly (!)
 > neighbours, we have not met...)
 >
 > I agree that
 "classic" IRMNG has/had some neat features, indeed
 I put them
 > in because that was what I
 wanted to see myself in a search result as a
 > client of my own system, so to speak.
 Having said that, there are some
 > other
 nice features in the VLIZ search and display software which
 I never
 > put into my version, that
 include simultaneous search across all ranks,
 > search of the literature, separation of
 accepted names from synonyms, a
 >
 searchable taxon tree, a set of web services for remote
 searching by other
 > applications, that I
 have not had to build, and extend the functionality
 > in
 > those areas. Plus
 the key aspects including homonym/same name display
 > across all kingdoms are supported, e.g.
 search for genus = "Ceratium"
 >
 gives
 > the following:
 >
 > (from
 > http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxlist&tName=Ceratium&rComp=%3D&tRank=180&action=search
 > )
 > ---------------
 > Search for '*Ceratium*' returned 6
 matching records. Click on one of the
 >
 taxon names listed below to check the details. [new
 search
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=search>]
 [direct link
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxlist>]
 >
 > *Ceratium* Schrank,
 1793
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1273897>
 > *Ceratium* Gistl, 1848
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1274070>
 > *Ceratium* Thienemann, 1828
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1274013>
 accepted as
 > *Phycita* Curtis, 1828
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1325008>
 > *Ceratium* Blume, 1825
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1274128>
 accepted as
 > *Eria* J.
 > Lindley, 1825 <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1352801>
 > *Ceratium* Agassiz, 1846
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1274194>
 accepted as
 > *Keratella* Bory de St.
 Vincent, 1827
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1350212>
 > *Ceratium* J.B. Albertini & L.D.
 Schweinitz, 1805
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1273955>
 accepted as
 > *Ceratiomyxa* J.
 Schröter in Engler & Prantl, 1889
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1072848>
 >
 > ---------------
 > Also the fuzzy matching is there, but only
 if a submitted spelling is not
 > found,
 example:
 >
 > Search
 for '*Ceratius*' returned 0 matching records,
 > but 77 *fuzzy*, matching records. Click on
 one of the taxon names listed
 > below to
 check the details. [new search
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=search>]
 [direct link
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxlist>]
 >
 > *Ceracis* Mellié,
 1849
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1300176>
 > *Cerais* Van der Wulp, 1881
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1294709>
 > *Cerallus* Jacquelin du Val, 1859
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1389602>
 > *Ceramis* Gerstaecker, 1858
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1447898>
 accepted as
 > *Hylaia*
 Guérin-Ménéville, 1857
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1424224>
 > *Ceramium* A.W. Roth, 1797
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1268868>
 > *Ceramium* Blume, 1827
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1268939>
 accepted as
 > *Thottea* Rottboell,
 1783
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1354867>
 > *Ceramium* Wiggers, 1780
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1469377>
 > *Ceramius* Latreille, 1810
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1440314>
 > *Ceramus* Rafinesque, 1815
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1422472>
 (nomen nudum)
 > *Ceranicus* <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1284748>
 > *Ceranigus* Hoffmann, 1968
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1460126>
 accepted as
 > *Curanigus* Faust, 1898
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1412046>
 > *Ceranisus* Walker, 1842
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1400284>
 > *Ceranthus* Schreber, 1789
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1323050>
 accepted as
 > *Chionanthus* Linnaeus,
 1753
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1295541>
 > *Ceranthus* Linnaeus, 1758
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1323089>
 > *Cerapus* Say, 1817
 >
 <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1379223>
 > *Cerastis* Ochsenheimer, 1816
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1299104>
 > *Cerastis* Kolbe, 1883
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1299135>
 accepted as
 > *Cerastipsocus* Kolbe,
 1884
 > <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1195354>
 > *Cerastium* Linnaeus, 1753
 > ( <http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1273262>etc.)
 >
 > The two main
 differences between the result display for "old"
 and "new"
 > IRMNG being that in
 the new results, near matches are suppressed when the
 > input name correctly matches at least one
 name currently held, and the
 > taxonomic
 position + publication details for a name are not in the
 results
 > list but on the page for each
 name (we can maybe talk to VLIZ about
 >
 promoting these features or making them options in the
 "advanced search",
 > as and
 when they do their next priority assignment (I am also
 cc-ing to
 > WoRMS/VLIZ for their
 interest).
 >
 >
 Stepping back a little, it is important to realize that
 IRMNG had a
 > limited-to-zero long term
 future at CSIRO in the advent of my departure
 > which happened in 2014: with the best will
 in the world, a freely
 > distributed,
 global-coverage system such as IRMNG would never be core
 > business for them in an increasingly
 "research business" environment, and
 > also such systems need a local
 carer-and-feeder to remain alive and
 >
 thriving, which function is no longer there, but is present
 in good
 > measure
 > at
 VLIZ - in fact their IT/data management team is second to
 none plus
 > they
 >
 already have a precedent for ongoing, distributed editorship
 as with WoRMS
 > (and again, like all
 things, the data held for any name, and the remote
 > edit interface can and no doubt will
 evolve further with time and
 >
 expressed
 > user needs).
 >
 > Also I realise that
 for the marine species component of IRMNG (at least
 > the
 > extant ones),
 IRMNG and WoRMS will now no longer look very different to
 > the
 > user which is a
 good thing, as WoRMS has saved the trouble of IRMNG
 having
 > to research that data
 separately, and much of it can and is already being
 > replicated across both systems (when IRMNG
 started in 2006, WoRMS did not
 > exist
 and so IRMNG effectively was serving both purposes). Where
 IRMNG
 > does
 > not
 duplicate WoRMS are its extensive holdings of nonmarine and
 fossil
 > names (at genus level in
 particular, but also 1 million + species names),
 > all within the same system as the marine
 ones for cross-domain (and Code)
 > name
 resolution and comparison as needed, for filtering by
 habitat and
 > fossil status, and for
 generating a synoptic view of "all life" (e.g.
 by
 > browsing the taxon tree or reporting
 statistics by taxonomic group) that
 >
 WoRMS simply cannot produce.
 >
 > I think the main thing is that VLIZ has
 made an offer to take IRMNG
 > onwards
 > and upwards in a way that few others can
 do and for the sake of
 > continuation of
 the IRMNG data content and services to users, that is by
 > far the best way forward for it and for me
 (in that if I fall under a bus
 >
 tomorrow, or suddenly lose my interest in taxonomy and
 biodiversity, the
 > system will not be
 compromised), and also there are many synergies between
 > IRMNG and WoRMS, and the other taxonomic
 databases managed at VLIZ, that
 > offer
 benefits to multiple systems for the future. So allowing for
 the
 > fact
 > that
 aspects such as what is directly returned to a user after
 submitting
 > a
 >
 search, and/or the remote taxon name edit form, can all
 change in the
 > future and be influenced
 by user feedback, I would say the future for
 > IRMNG
 > looks very good
 even if I and other users have to get used to editing and
 > seeing my/our search results in a slightly
 different way than previously.
 >
 > For the record, the ex-Nomenclator
 Zoologicus content (which has been
 >
 vetted in many cases and had some errors fixed, etc.) which
 is displayed
 > for animal genus names in
 IRMNG is still there on every relevant "genus
 > level" page; it is also mostly
 accessible (if the original uBio/MBL copy
 > is
 > offline as seems
 at present) via a copy put online via Rod Page, with
 > additional document links he has created,
 at http://iphylo.org/~rpage/nz/
 > .
 >
 > Further comment welcome of course,
 >
 > Best regards -
 Tony
 >
 >
 > Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
 > https://about.me/TonyRees
 >
 > On 20 July 2016 at
 21:42, Geoff Read <gread at actrix.gen.nz>
 wrote:
 >
 >>
 >> Hi Tony,
 >>
 >> IRMNG at WoRMS at present looks to me
 as just another context variant of
 >>
 the WoRMS Aphia database (I'm a WoRMS editor). The
 search interface has
 >> the same
 limited options basic to WoRMS.
 >>
 >> This seems a step back. Where is the
 functionality of the old IRMNG for
 >>
 finding and displaying homonym info and near matches in
 spelling under
 >> any
 >> genus name as a unified display. This
 was the only aspect I used it for.
 >>
 Particularly important now  as Nomenclator zoologicus
 online appears to
 >> have died
 again.
 >>
 >>
 People can still look up any genus at
 >> http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/irmng/
 and see the BIG difference in
 >>
 the two initial outputs.
 >>
 >> I wanted the Classic IRMNG
 continued.  Perhaps WoRMS should think about
 >> putting similar extended info into
 their initial search-result pages.
 
 
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 
 Contributing Intellectual
 Liquidity for 29 years in 2016.



More information about the Taxacom mailing list