No, the “plant” ID only disagrees with the taxa between the original ID and “plant”. So if the first ID is a vascular plant, a second disagreeing higher ID of “plant” will be disagreeing with all vascular plant IDs. But if the observation is reidentified as a moss later on, the “plant” ID will not be in disagreement with those later IDs. It is working as intended.
Related topics
| Topic | Replies | Views | Activity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change wording used by the system when downgrading an observation to an higher level taxa | 253 | 20205 | December 29, 2024 | |
| Hints for dealing with identifiers who don't understand the system? | 61 | 2877 | February 18, 2025 | |
| Disagreements with a Research Grade record | 61 | 2788 | March 24, 2022 | |
| Disruptive disagreement on identifications | 47 | 1972 | September 19, 2023 | |
| Ancestor disagreement shouldn't necessarily disagree with child taxon just because it contains descendant | 20 | 654 | March 14, 2025 |