Merging a "form" with a species

Essentially, right now exists:

D. minuta form ornata
D. minuta form couloni
D. minuta form saundersi

AND

D. ornata
D. couloni
D. saundersi

Because of previously conflicting taxonomy, european Dicyrtomina are considered unique species (D. 1, D. 2, etc), where as in the USA they are considered forms of D. minuta (D. minuta f. 1, etc). Recent taxonomic revisions suggest that the “forms” constitute unique species worldwide.

But I have no idea how to logistically go about turning a form of a species into its own species, when that species already exists in iNaturalist taxonomy. Any advice would be appreciated.

Summarized: The goal is for “D. minuta f. couloni” to be merged with “D. couloni”, and so forth for the 3 forms. My only idea is to split the 3 forms into 3 new species, THEN merge those 3 with the existing 3.

Generally you’d just do swaps (not merges) for each of the forms:

  1. Swap D. minuta form ornata to D. ornata
  2. Swap D. minuta form couloni to D. couloni (D. couloni does not seem to be on iNat as a species, so you’d need to import or manually create the taxon first)
  3. Swap D. minuta form saundersi to D. saundersi

If after these swaps there are still a lot of observations of D. minuta s.l. that refer to the 3 new species, you can do an additional split to migrate observations to the correct species, by splitting D. minuta sensu lato into 4 species:

  • D. minuta sensu stricto
  • D. ornata
  • D. couloni
  • D. saundersi

If the different species have different distributions, make sure each of the 4 new species are atlased before the split. Hope this helps.

1 Like

That worked, thank you! I don’t know why I thought it would be more complicated.

please do not make changes like this just because recent evidence suggests they ‘may’ be distinct species. In the very least there needs to be a peer reviewed paper, and really in my opinion the change shouldn’t be made unless secondary sources have adopted that. Obviously others disagree with this but in the very least we should not be making changes until papers are peer reviewed and published.

2 Likes

I agree taxon changes requires solid sources (don’t think we have an External Taxonomic Authority for Collembola), but as things are now on iNat we have the same taxon at 2 different ranks (e.g. both D. minuta form ornata and D. ornata), which is not ideal. Another issue is that the ICZN does not recognise taxa below subspecies (unlike the ICN) so we shouldn’t have “forms” in animal taxonomy.

I submitted the original flag – while there is some uncertainty about whether the different phenotypes are different species or different forms of the same species, this was not the primary issue here.

The issue was that both taxonomies were already being used on iNat. One way or another, this is something that needs to be resolved.

Additionally, there is a geographic component – European literature has tended to treat them as distinct species, whereas North American literature has treated them as forms.

There may be some open questions about whether the N. American and European populations in fact represent the same species or group of species, but even if that is the case, it is only going to create confusion if the name used for the form in N. America is the same as the name of a different species.

well, i mean, if the forms are based on a published paper and the proposed new species aren’t, then that answers a lot of the question. Though i agree, we should have capability to add forms, if for no other reason than to stop people making up new species that don’t make any sense.

Once again: that isn’t what is going on here. Don’t project your annoyance about what you consider to be unnecessary splitting for some taxa to cases that have nothing to do with it.

It isn’t as simple as one taxonomy having been published and the other has not. There are publications supporting both taxonomies (the “proposed new species” are not new); it is less clear which one is correct, which names are in fact synonymous, and whether the species recognized on one side of the Atlantic are the same as the ones on the other side. Springtails are tiny and understudied.

i don’t think it’s appropriate for you to talk to me this way, i think my post was on topic. But since there’s nothing else to say about it, i’ll stop posting in this thread now.

1 Like

Since the original question of this post has been solved and is not being addressed by further discussion, I am closing the topic.

1 Like