[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