Wrong name in Euphorbia

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 (I use a computer)

App version number, if a mobile app issue (shown under Settings or About): not really, I use a computer.

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

URLs (aka web addresses) of any relevant observations or pages: https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/803657-Espinosae

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: Enter the Euphorbia taxa.

Step 2: Go to Chamaesyce > Sect. Espinosae

Step 3: Scroll down. It links to a fish page. Refreshing it does nothing: but if you go back to Chamaesyce and forth to Espinosae, it briefly shows the fish before actually showing Euphorbia. Refreshing gets you back to the fish only, and so on. Fish link: https://eol.org/pages/46560689

Hope this helps. Thanks!


Normally the way to fix such a mistake is to flag a taxon for curation. However, I’m into Euphorbia and I’m a curator so I’ll do it as soon as I get home!


a few notes:
currently the subgenera do not have their own articles, much less the sections. Something I suppose I ought to work on…
so, I’ve put in the article for the genus Euphorbia.

to flag for curation, go here:


Wikidata/Wikipedia consider Chamaesyce a full genus, so there is already a page for it. Anyone can fix this by adding the correct iNaturalist taxon ID to Wikidata (or editing an existing one). It won’t quite agree with our taxonomic system, but otherwise the information should be relevant.

Thanks for pointing that out, but I’m not sure that the older genus Chamaesyce is equivalent to the current subgenus Chamaesyce under the newer version of genus Euphorbia. And since there is a disagreement on the taxon definition I went with the one closer to POWO / iNat.
@nathantaylor definitely knows better than I.

Genus Chamaesyce = Euphorbia subg. Chamaesyce sect. Anisophyllum. There isn’t an equivalent genus name to subg. Chamaesyce sensu Yang and Berry etc. I’m not sure if there is an older name equivalent to sect. Espinosae but it wouldn’t be on Wikipedia.

1 Like