[Taxacom] GBIF: perpetuating probably defunct unpublished names

Sun May 23 15:52:42 CDT 2010

when two teams are digging a tunnel through a mountain from opposite sides
it's good to have a plan for shake-hands somewhere in the middle. I believe
there are ways to combine the "buttom-up" and "top-down" approaches and
reach at a better communication between the two strategical concepts....

For example: GBIF has a data field for unchanged original names used by GBIF
data publishers (data field "Scientific Name" which you only get when you
download data from the portal). GBIF is trying to interpret these names (for
the searchable datafield "Scientific Name interpreted"), but without having
a reliable basis for such interpretation, they produce additional data
errors or - in some cases - even turn good data into trash...

Do we really need to wait for an "Index Animalium" (which was't meant to be
the same as ZooBank, I guess)?
In my mind, a straightforeward strategy would be that "top-down" projects
like GBIF offer a name interpretation tool where taxonomists who have
current checklists (bottom-up strategy) can directly assist in interpreting
the names used by GBIF data publishers.
I imagine the same strategy should work with a future GNUB database
(NameUsageBase), which has to play a key role (together with strictly
nomenclatural components like ZooBank) in a "global names architecture".
This is because we can only interpret names associated with a usage instance
(e.g., names in GBIF's "Scientific names" column), but hardly those "magic"
name strings currently displayed in the Global Names Index (GNI). It makes
sense to me that a GNUB database will later absorb (with more information
added) that "index" alltogether. And it will be the taxonomists only who can
interpret these GNUB names. Only "bottom-up" pains-taking work of taxon
specialists can result in reliable, up-to-date points of view needed to
understand name usages of the past. Large-scale "top-down" projects can
provide infrastructures to make such individual taxonomists' work easier and
the results better accessible for the wider community.

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
-------------------------------------------

Wolfgang Lorenz, Tutzing, Germany

2010/5/23 <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>

> Yes, and that would be ZooBank.
> Despite some delay, we are making progress. A progress report, probably
> with a timeline when a (useful) ZooBank will be up and running, will be
> published in one of the next Bull.Zool.Nom., and when the final draft of it
> will be available, we will certainly post it to Taxacom.
>
> Frank
>
> Dr Frank T. Krell
> Curator of Entomology
> Commissioner, International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature
> Chair, ICZN ZooBank Committee
> Department of Zoology
> Denver Museum of Nature & Science
> 2001 Colorado Boulevard
> Denver, CO 80205-5798 USA
> Frank.Krell at dmns.org
> Phone: (+1) (303) 370-8244
> Fax: (+1) (303) 331-6492
> http://www.dmns.org/science/curators/frank-krell
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [
> taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of David Remsen (GBIF) [
> dremsen at gbif.org]
> Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 5:37 AM
> To: Paul Kirk
> Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] GBIF: perpetuating probably defunct unpublished
> names
>
> Yes,  we need the zoological equivalent of Index Fungorum.   Store the
> basic required facts in one place please.
>
> On May 23, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Paul Kirk wrote:
>
> > name orthography and authorship data correctly belong in the
> > relevant nomenclator ... fix it there, once, and everyone who 'uses'
> > that name should then link to that source - problem solved.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Walker, Ken
> > Sent: Sun 23/05/2010 11:24
> > To: 'David Remsen (GBIF)'; Stephen Thorpe
> > Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] GBIF: perpetuating probably defunct
> > unpublished names
> >
> >
> >
> >> - The data published through GBIF are not qualitatively transformed
> > from the collections where they originate.
> >
> > But they do.
> >
> > Look at the authorship of Scolytus scolytus -
> >
> > In GBIF, EOL and Catalogue of Life 2007 the authorship is
> > incorrectly listed a Wood and Bright 1992:
> >
> > GBIF:  http://data.gbif.org/species/14616352/
> >
> > EOL: http://www.eol.org/pages/691357
> >
> > Catalogue of Life 2007:
> http://www.catalogueoflife.org/annual-checklist/2007/show_species_details.php?record_id=4242138
> >
> > However, in ITIS the authorship is corrected listed as (Fabricius,
> > 1775).
> >
> > The problem began when a mash up was made from the Electronic
> > Catalogue of Curculionoidea website.
> >
> > It correctly listed the authorship of Scolytus scolytus and cited
> > the publication of Wood and Bright 1992 as the source.  Somehow, the
> > mash up dropped the authorship name and replaced it with the
> > citation name. Then it spread ....
> >
> > Now, almost every weevil that occurs in North America and was listed
> > in the Wood and Bright 1992 publication has Wood and Bright as the
> > author of the those species: Here is the EOL Scoltyus species list.
> > Run your eye down the list to see how many species have Wood and
> > Bright 1992 as their authorship:  http://www.eol.org/pages/49702
> >
> > I sent emails to GBIF and EOL without receiving a reply and so like
> > hitting your head against a brick wall -- I felt better when I
> > stopped.
> >
> > I am beginning to wonder whether discrete taxon treatment websites
> > are indeed better than those that attempt to do all.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > Ken Walker
> > Museum Victoria
> > Australia
> > ************************************************************************
> > The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted
> > with it is confidential and is for the exclusive use of the intended
> > recipient. If you are not the intended recipient please note that
> > any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the
> > information in it is prohibited.
> >
> > Whilst CAB International trading as CABI takes steps to prevent the
> > transmission of viruses via e-mail, we cannot guarantee that any e-
> > mail or attachment is free from computer viruses and you are
> > strongly advised to undertake your own anti-virus precautions.
> >
> > If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
> > by e-mail at cabi at cabi.org or by telephone on +44 (0)1491 829199 and
> > then delete the e-mail and any copies of it.
> >
> > CABI is an International Organization recognised by the UK
> > Government under Statutory Instrument 1982 No. 1071.
> >
> >
> **************************************************************************
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> 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
>