Why is non-consensus taxonomy being used by iNaturalist?

Why is the proposed splitting of Pseudacris regilla into three species recognized by iNaturalist when none of the databases ie: Amphibiaweb recognize it?
I know that the split is also dismissed by most herpetologists since no range or diagnostic features were delineated in the proposed split…
Is there a reason for this particular taxonomy, and is there a way to fix out of step taxonomy?

1 Like

iNat follows specific taxonomic authorities for all of its taxonomy.

2 Likes

See discussion in https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/365970 as it sounds like there is a lot of discontent.

5 Likes

Who would be the authority they are following in this case be though? There are many taxonomic changes I don’t agree with that make sense being followed here since they are recognized by many taxonomic authorities.
I don’t want to cause offense, but this particular split is almost Raymond Hoser level in terms of recognition, the IUCN, Amphibiaweb, etc. don’t recognize it… that’s why I’m confused.

Thanks, will do!

Edit: upon reading it seems like the exact same contention I have…

Hi @phrynosoma20, and welcome to the iNat forum!

If you have questions about a taxonomic change or decision, a good place to start is the list of external taxonomic authorities that iNat uses as its baseline: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator%2Bguide#authorities

You might also want to take a look at iNat’s taxonomy policies: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator%2Bguide#policies

There may also be a flag on the particular taxon that you’re interested in. If so, that’s probably the best place to engage other users who have an interest in this change.

4 Likes

Thanks for the info!