Atención: Algunas o todas las identificaciones afectadas por esta división puede haber sido reemplazada por identificaciones de Giraffa. Esto ocurre cuando no podemos asignar automáticamente una identificación a uno de los taxones de salida. Revisar identificaciones de Giraffa camelopardalis 42157

Taxonomic Split 134854 (Guardado el 23/11/2023)

Whole genome analysis of giraffe supports four distinct species
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(21)00546-7.pdf

ASM Mammal Diversity Database Ver. 1.... (Referencia)
Añadido por rjq en 20 de noviembre de 2023 a las 04:51 PM | Resuelto por rjq en 23 de noviembre de 2023
dividido en

Comentarios

@michalsloviak @zarek any comments on the atlases, especially in Kenya?

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

Have built in some overlap in Kenya, so there will be some obs that need to be manually re-IDed

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

You realize that this will open up obscured data.
That is perfectly OK for southern Africa (specifically South Africa) - so that is OK for Giraffa giraffa ssp. angolensis Angolan Giraffe and Giraffa giraffa ssp. giraffa Southern African Giraffe. Please do not obscure these.

OK: no issue, I see that Giraffa tippelskirchi is obscured at the subspecies level, but perhaps given that the two subspecies are VU and EN, that IDs to species level Giraffa tippelskirchi should be obscured as well?

Anotado por tonyrebelo hace 7 meses

Can somebody please fix the Range Map - so that it reflects the new species, rather than just the genus?

Anotado por tonyrebelo hace 7 meses

@rjq maps for Kenya essentially look correct. It'll take time to go through all the coarse ID's and get users to specify new species when they originally just left it at G. camelopardalis.

Anotado por zarek hace 7 meses

@rjq have you had a look at this? https://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12915-023-01722-y
Interesting that they don't seem to find much hybridisation in tsavo along the galana river, but there's so much visual evidence of it. A few iNat research grade observations show ssp. reticulata deep in the heart of Fennessy's ssp. tippelskirchi maps.

Anotado por zarek hace 7 meses

Thanks, hadn't seen that paper.

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

@tonyrebelo thanks for raising the point about obscuring data. I can't work out if it is possible to obscure data without a threat assessment for the taxon (which there isn't for species level tippelskirchi)?

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

@rjq by the way, as the IUCN SSC Giraffe and Okapi Specialist Group recognizes only a single giraffe species, what's the iNat rationale for now recognizing the 4 separate species?
ssp. tippelskirchi is listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List.

Anotado por zarek hace 7 meses

The ASM Mammal Diversity Database has accepted the taxon split into 4 recognized species + multiple studies support this so we are deviating from IUCN
https://www.mammaldiversity.org/

Anotado por safron hace 7 meses

Thanks @safron

Anotado por zarek hace 7 meses

Sorry: I dont know how or if you can obscure without a threat statement.
But you can add a status of unevaluated and then obscure the data.

Anotado por tonyrebelo hace 7 meses

Thanks Tony, that looks to have worked

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

@loarie @jwidness @bobby23 @jakob any reason not to go ahead? The subspecies have already been transferred, this split is tidying up the IDs

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

Fine with me!

Anotado por jakob hace 7 meses

@rjq have taxon changes been set up for the subspecies taxa?

Anotado por bobby23 hace 7 meses
Anotado por tonyrebelo hace 7 meses

@bobby23 yes, subspecies changes have already been committed

Anotado por rjq hace 7 meses

OLD subspecies changes committed as can be seen by the observations in the split species, and if you dig, in the NEW subspecies too. Only the observations at the old species level (which effectively, as there was only one species, was merely an ID at generic level) remain to be tackled in this split: hence the need for the atlases, otherwise all would just go to a genus level ID (which one could argue, would be more correct based on the IDs made).

Anotado por tonyrebelo hace 7 meses

Thanks, @rjq. the split looks good to me :)

Anotado por bobby23 hace 7 meses

Añade un comentario

Entra o Regístrate para añadir comentarios