Should I identify to subspecies level when there is only one subspecies left

This question is for all those taxonomy experts out there.
For some context in the country I live in, New Zealand, we have a bird called the Kereru, which is a species of pigeon.
There used to be two different subspecies - Mainland Kereru and Norfolk Island Kereru.
Norfolk Island Kereru has become extinct.
Now for my question: is it still worth identifying to the Mainland subspecies level or does it make more sense leaving it at species level as there is only that one subspecies left?

I generally much prefer to identify to subspecies level as much as I can especially as New Zealand has many regional subspecies, but this quite a unique case so I’m not sure what formally the correct thing to do here is.

Thank you :)

1 Like

You could do either and neither would be wrong. Given you only have one form of this bird, adding the subspecies is optional.

4 Likes

There’s a similar situation with the Gadwall with the nominate subspecies being the only one that’s extant. Speaking as someone who identifies other’s observations, I choose to ID at the species-level. It’s just faster to press ‘agree’ than to type in the subspecies name. Sometimes, users get confused by the use by the subspecies name too.

Overall, it’s just easier to stick to the species in situations like these.

2 Likes

I concur that the choice is entirely yours and either would be OK.
However, there’s a particular situation when I think subspecies level IDs are counter-productive: I’ve seen cases where the species has an accepted common name but various subspecies do not (and probably won’t). In those cases (certain plants, birds, and butterflies in the examples I’ve encountered), the subspecies trinomials are little more than named geographic segments of the larger population. In such cases, moving an observation to subspecies level results in it being displayed with only its trinomial scientific name. I’m comfortable with that but it can obfuscate the type of organism for those iNatters who don’t routinely use or learn scientific names.
In the case of your two pigeon subspecies, it sounds like each has an accepted common name so this issue won’t be a problem.

4 Likes

And then there is the opposite situation: the Greater Prairie Chicken, in which the nominate subspecies is the only one that is extinct.

2 Likes

I generally don’t pay much attention to subspecies unless there’s something about one that warrants attention. For example, one subspecies but not others in the species has a special conservation status. Or it is very distinctive compared to others. Or it is considered a separate species by some or is expected to be elevated to species status in the near future.

2 Likes