Two conflicting Amaranthus IDs results in a CID of "Complex Amaranthus hybridus," an unrelated taxon

[suecar]

Please fill out the following sections to the best of your ability, it will help us investigate bugs if we have this information at the outset. Screenshots are especially helpful, so please provide those if you can.

Platform (Android, iOS, Website): website

App version number, if a mobile app issue (shown under Settings or About):

Browser, if a website issue (Firefox, Chrome, etc) : Safari

URLs (aka web addresses) of any relevant observations or pages: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/240603925
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1409842-Amaranthus-hybridus

Screenshots of what you are seeing (instructions for taking a screenshot on computers and mobile devices: https://www.take-a-screenshot.org/):

Description of problem (please provide a set of steps we can use to replicate the issue, and make as many as you need.):

Step 1: In Identify mode, I see an observation identified as Amaranthus palmeri: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/240603925

Step 2: I add a disagreeing ID of Amaranthus watsoni, which is the common local species for this region.

Step 3: The resulting CID is a complex involving an unrelated Amaranthus taxon, “Complex Amaranthus hybridus.” I think the result of my added ID should just result in a CID of “Amaranthus.” Is this a bug, or a POWO issue? I flagged the taxon page for Complex Amaranthus hybridus but I’m not sure that was the proper course of action: https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/702582

[swampster]

Both Amaranthus palmeri and A. watsonii are nested within the complex, so when there is a disagreement between the two, the complex, being the lowest common taxon, is the CID.

Please note, “Complex Amaranthus hybridus” is not the same thing as Amaranthus hybridus, the species. For more info, see this post: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/why-is-the-word-complex-added-to-some-binomial-names/55702/5.

This is not a bug. I am not at all familiar with the taxonomy of this group, but if you believe the species truly should not lie within this complex, you should flag the taxon and discuss there, as you have already done.

[suecar]

OK, I see that. Thanks. It’s just a confusing result for this particular region, where the dominant CV suggestion is A. palmeri but 99% of the plants are one species, Amaranthus watsonii. I don’t want my ID to imply that there are even more species to consider.

[swampster]

@suecar

I don’t want my ID to imply that there are even more species to consider.

No worries there. The complex actually refers to far fewer species than the genus Amaranthus as a whole, though I understand why the syntax could be confusing.