Genus filter in Taxon Scheme page doesn't seem to work

Bug Reports
1

There is a webpage that allows you to see all the taxa associated with a given taxon scheme. For example, this shows the taxa that are set up with the GBIF taxon scheme (https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_schemes/27):

image
image1025×995 150 KB

On that page, there’s a genus filter, but it doesn’t seem to work. For example, I know that genus Rudbeckia and Rudbeckia hirta are both tied to GBIF. So I would expect that if I input genus Rudbeckia into the filter on the page, I should get back only taxa under genus Rudbeckia which are tied to GBIF. Instead, I get a “Genera only please” message, with no other results (https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_schemes/27?utf8=✓&filters[taxon_scheme_id]=27&filters[taxon_id]=62742):

image
image1025×447 22.6 KB

…

Besides the filter not working, I think it would be useful if each of the taxon records returned included the identifier for the taxon scheme. I can see the identifier on the taxon schemes page for a given taxon (ex. https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/62742/schemes), and I think including the identifier on the taxon schemes page filtered by a particular genus would give a nice way to see where there might be incorrect setups. For example, right now, I have to visit 2 different pages to see that genus Rudbeckia and Rudbeckia hirta are set up with the same GBIF identifier. So it would be nice to see all the Rudbeckia taxa together with their GBIF identifiers to be able to be able to quickly spot and correct issues.

1 Like
2

I just tried this and the genus search does appear to be work sometimes. For example, I tried this with Sisyrinchium and got a long page of results. That page appears to show the following categories:

  1. Sisyrinchium taxa that are linked to GBIF through the taxon scheme structure
  2. Sisyrinchium taxa without links to GBIF that have been subject to taxon changes
  3. Inactive GBIF Sisyrinchium taxa not directly connected to active taxa
  4. Active Sisyrinchium taxa not directly connected to GBIF Sisyrinchium

That said, the Sisyrinchium report appears to cover 66 species, which is maybe a third of the genus. From what I can tell, categories 1 and 4 (and maybe 3) appear to only include species that are direct children of the genus and to exclude those placed within a taxonomic section. Category 2 appears to be based on scanning through taxon change records, which may include taxa now placed in taxonomic sections.

So this search only appears to be able to handle one level of hierarchy. I’m guessing that may be a big part of the problem with Rudbeckia, which contains three child sections but no direct child species. It is possible to select a section name in the genus field and click the Filter button, but this doesn’t return any useful results.

I took a look also at Melilotus, a genus with 23 child species, 2 child hybrids, and no sections. The taxon scheme report for Melilotus includes:

16 Melilotus taxa that are linked to GBIF through the taxon scheme structure
1 Melilotus taxon without links to GBIF that has been subject to taxon changes
0 Inactive GBIF Melilotus taxa not directly connected to active taxa
7 Active Melilotus taxa not directly connected to GBIF Sisyrinchium

So this report appears to include every species that is a child of the Melilotus genus, but not either of the 2 hybrid child taxa.

This would be great, but currently this info is not contained in the report.

1 Like