Leading subspecies IDs should change the obs taxon like leading IDs of other ranks

[mftasp]

@jasonhernandez74

Or, people could stop obsessing so much on subspecies and first make sure that the observation gets IDed to species. For observations already at species, then subspecies become relevant.

Absolutely not. Subspecies are valid, separate taxa.

[jasonhernandez74]

@dianastuder

why is only the subspecies ignored?

Actually, I have been wondering why only the subspecies gets RG without two agreeing IDs.

1st ID to class
2nd ID to subspecies
3rd ID to species
yields RG at subspecies

But there is no 2/3 agreement on the subspecies! One ID to subspecies and one to species add up only to 2/3 agreement on species. So that’s where it should be RG in such a case, per iNat’s established rules.

[dianastuder]

Sometimes iNat’s What’s This explains the convoluted arithmetic they use for a particular obs.

[matthewvosper]

I don’t think this is right. The fact that it so confusing illustrates that something could be done better. The point is that RG officially attaches to the community taxon, not the ‘observation taxon’:

1st ID to class: Community taxon = N/A ; Observation taxon = Class
2nd ID to subspecies: Community taxon = Class ; Observation taxon = Class (the issue being raised here)
3rd ID to species: Community taxon = Species (RG) ; but Observation taxon = Subspecies
4th ID to subspecies: Community taxon = Subspecies (RG) ; Observation taxon = Subspecies

(Although I’ve heard that it is sometimes the observation taxon that gets exported when the community taxon reaches RG, which is a separate issue.)

[jasonhernandez74]

@mftasp

Subspecies are valid, separate taxa.

The way iNaturalist works, that means we will start seeing observations identified as, Genus Melospiza (or maybe Family Passerellidae), with a comment to the effect: “it’s a hybrid between San Pablo Song Sparrow and Alameda Song Sparrow,” and a flag requesting the creation of a taxon Melospiza melodia ssp samuelis X Melospiza melodia ssp. pusillula.

[mftasp]

Hybrids are not taxa, but I see no problem with that.

[fffffffff]

I’m sorry, but there’s no possibility to add hybrids of subspecies within iNat, why would they be ided to genus if it’s a mix of ssp. of one species is also hard to get from your example? We have to id ssp. hybrids as parent species https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/25055236
You wrote a couple times about your views on hybrids, but other people may care more about correctly iding a specimen.

[mftasp]

Yeah, you’re right, you can’t have hybrids between subspecies full stop.

[jasonhernandez74]

@fffffffff

why would they be ided to genus if it’s a mix of ssp. of one species

Because that’s how certain users work.

[anon83178471]

@jasonhernandez74

people could stop obsessing so much on subspecies

Some subspecies make a huge difference. I mainly ID phragmites, and in the US, there is a dangerously invasive subspecies and a native, very rare and fleeting subspecies. The difference between the terrible invasive one and the one that is native and maybe completely gone from a lot of states (but nobody knows for sure) is massive. And important. I know for some stuff it isn’t that important, but for some things it makes a huge difference and matters a whole lot. I try to ID all phragmites observations to subspecies because tracking what subspecies is where can be a huge deal.

[mftasp]

@anon83178471

The difference between the terrible invasive one and the one that is native and maybe completely gone from a lot of states (but nobody knows for sure) is massive.

In my experience working as a plant taxonomist, it is quite common for subspecies to be upgraded to full species over time. Botanists often end up describing cryptic species that only differ outwardly by a small degree first as subspecies.

As we learn more about them, particularly with the advent of molecular biology, it’s pretty common that we realise that they’re actually unrelated and should never have been part of the same species.

[jasonhernandez74]

@mftasp

you can’t have hybrids between subspecies

Of course, this would mean that not every individual of a given species is in any subspecies. If a San Pablo Song Sparrow and and Alameda Song Sparrow paired up and produced offspring, those offspring would be, what? Probably just Song Sparrows of no subspecies. But I see that Marina already said that.

@fffffffff

We have to id ssp. hybrids as parent species

[tiwane]

OK, this has been implemented! Note that right now it will only work for observations that are newly reindexed since this was released a few minutes ago. We’re going to run a script to update the ~ 275k observations which this affects, that might take a few hours.

I forced a reindex on one of my observations to update it, as an example:

Let us know if you see any bugs or weirdness.

[dianastuder]

Thank you!

Now I won’t have to use my textexpander for
‘Supporting ssp’

[tonyrebelo]

Thank you. This has been a long time coming …

[blue_celery]

[lotteryd]

So this means I won’t have to accidentally anger some butterfly experts with my “adding to unglitch ssp” trick in the Lepidoptera pile anymore? Woohoo! :)

[tiwane]

Great, glad it seems to be working. I’ll close this now - if you see any issues, please make a bug report.