The map of the subtribe Ecliptinae does not show all the observations, on the map you can only see a few observations, but if you see the map of the genus Sphagneticola there are many more, this does not make sense because that genus belongs to the subtribe Ecliptinae, it should not be shown those observations since they belong to a lower taxon?
The map of the subtribe Ecliptinae.
that’s an interesting problem. i don’t know if it is related to maps specifically, since records returned on the Explore page for genus Sphagneticola (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=any&taxon_id=246103) are also unexpectedly high compared to records for suntribe Ecliptinae (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=any&taxon_id=639448). but it definitely looks like a problem. it’s especially strange because some Sphagneticola records do get picked up in the Ecliptinae results.
quick update with screenshots. the problem i noted earlier isn’t as obvious now, but you still see it looks like there is a count mismatch at a species level for S. calendula (similar to the problem reported in https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/number-of-observations-is-incorrect/9946). the map also still has some mismatches.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=any&subview=grid&taxon_id=246103&view=species
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=any&subview=grid&taxon_id=639448&view=species
