[Re:] # dots on map

[Richard Rabeler]

I see three alternatives that could arise from the scenario that Thomas
puts forth.

Ignore the Ecuador record.  If you can't see the specimen and don't want
to make an assumption, this is the safest.

One could assume the Ecuador collection is correctly identified
and change the map. If you get to see the specimen later and find it's
misidentified, the chances of "getting the word" out that the map needs
correcting might be difficult.  The error might more likely be repeated
than corrected.

Another possibility would be to map the Ecuador specimen with a different
symbol and clearly state in any caption or text that it has been reported
from there and that you have not been able to verify it.  You have
accounted for it but have not given it complete credence pending
verification, either by you or by another worker who may also be
interested in the group.  I've used this option in my work on tracking the
distribution of introduced weeds.

Richard K. Rabeler
Collections Manager, Vascular Plants
University of Michigan

On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Thomas Schlemmermeyer wrote:

> Interesting question. One could refine it in the following manner:
> How many dots does one need to change an already existing map?
>
> Let us say species X is known only from Southeastern Brazil. Only? No! There is
> one single record from Ecuador. However, it is not possible to check the sample
> from Ecuador. Shall one change the distribution map or not?
> And if one changes,.....How?  Two disjunct patterns? or the hypothesis that the
> species ocurrs all over South America but has not been collected so far....?
>
>
> On (         Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:59:11 -0800
> ),         Brian Brown <bbrown at NHM.ORG> wrote:
>
>
> >Does anyone have an opinion about how many dots (=distribution records) a
> >map needs to be useful? Many of my species are known from only one or two
> >sites, so a map of their distribution would probably be a waste of space and
> >time (but maybe other people think otherwise?). How many locality records
> >does it take to interest biogeographers?
> >
> >Brian
> >________________________________________
> >
> >Brian V. Brown
> >Entomology Section
> >Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
> >900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA, 90007, U.S.A.
> >
> >tel: (213) 763-3363   fax: (213) 746-2999
> >email: bbrown at nhm.org
> >http://www.lam.mus.ca.us/lacmnh/departments/research/entomology
> >
>