[Taxacom] taxonomic names databases

[Nadia Talent]

Hi Stephen,

Those are extreme examples, seemingly Leptus japonicus and Crepis japonicus were turned into the not even remotely related Cleopus japonicus. The second, but not the first might perhaps be an OCR phenomenon? As for the first, I've seen what might be a similar mechanism, but the names that were mixed up were plausibly synonyms, differing in the species epithet, as if some other database were the source of hypercorrection (Allamanda neriifolia was put in place of Allamanda schottii; the replacement is, strangely, the junior synonym).

Perhaps a weevil genus name exists that an overly imaginative OCR corrector could mistake for Leptus, and a synonymy database lurking somewhere then links it to Cleopus.

I would argue that synonyms do not belong in the "Scientific Names on this Page" list; if they are to appear at all, it should only be as a clearly marked option. I hope nobody is using those "Scientific Names on this Page" as data for analysis!

Nadia 
-------------------------------
Nadia Talent
Research Associate,
Royal Ontario Museum,
Green Plant Herbarium (TRT),
Department of Natural History,
100 Queen's Park,
Toronto, Canada, M5S 2C6
http://nadiatalent.github.io

On Aug 22, 2016, at 0:52, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:

> Here is an example of what can and does go wrong with automated methods: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/name/Cleopus_japonicus_Wingelm$,_1914
> If you click on either of the linked pages, you will find no mention of Cleopus japonicus, except in the "Scientific Names on this Page" field on the left! Something is going awry and askew!
> 
> Stephen