"Introduced in Newcomb's Wildflower Guide Range" mention for Lucilia sericata

[hungry-sarracenia]

Platform:
Website

App version number:

Browser:
Firefox (Linux), Firefox (MacOS), Edge (MacOS)

URLs (aka web addresses) of any relevant observations or pages:
https://inaturalist.ca/observations/228851863
https://inaturalist.ca/observations/222153262
https://inaturalist.ca/observations/165802501
https://inaturalist.ca/observations/226250847
https://inaturalist.ca/places/newcomb-s-wildflower-guide-range

Screenshots of what you are seeing:

Description of problem (please provide a set of steps we can use to replicate the issue, and make as many as you need.):

Step 1:
Navigate to an observation of Lucilia sericata made in Repentigny, Qc, Canada.
Step 2:
Click on the pink exclamation mark next to the species name.

Observations of Lucilia sericata have the region where they were introduced as “Newcomb’s Wildflower Guide Range” instead of the usual region where the observation was made.
My observations of Lucilia sericata done in Repentigny, Qc, Canada, all have this mention.
I found this issue on observations in other parts of Canada as well, as shown by the 3rd and 4th URLs that I included.
Other introduced species in Repentigny have either “Introduced in Québec, CA” or “Introduced in L’Assomption, CA, QC”, as can be seen in the second screenshot.
I don’t think the region Newcomb’s Wildflower Guide Range · iNaturalist Canada being used instead of more precise regions is intended behaviour.
The third screenshot shows that not all observations of Lucilia sericata within the region “Newcomb’s Wildflower Guide Range” have this issue.

[bouteloua]

Its establishment means on the place checklist for L’Assomption was set as “unknown” and when I changed it to “introduced” it no longer said Newcomb’s. It would be the same for other “lower” places.

But does someone have a source for it being considered introduced in North America?

[bernalarce]

This is a surprisingly tough request because L. sericata spread to the whole world hundreds of years ago, likely following European domestic sheep. I found many papers and books that simply assume it was originally Palearctic or cite older descriptions, and eventually I found two of the original sources for that assertion.

The most accessible is Aubertin (1933), this work reviewed the whole genus Lucilia across the world, and at the time L. sericata was still more abundant and widespread in the Palearctic. There is also the original species description in Meigen (1826) but all he says is that the species is found in Hamburg, Germany.

[tiwane]

I don’t think it’s a bug? Newcomb’s Wildflower Guide Range doesn’t have a parent place so it doesn’t have a position in iNat’s hierarchy. The observations were indexed as being in Newcomb’s Wildflower Guide Range and any establishment means linked to that species in that places was being applied to the observation.

I changed the establishment means for that species in that place to “Unknown” and the label is gone now.