[eml-dev] [Bug 5704] New: update documentation for species binomials

[bugzilla-daemon at ecoinformatics.org]

http://bugzilla.ecoinformatics.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5704

             Bug #: 5704
           Summary: update documentation for species binomials
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: EML
           Version: 2.1.0
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: eml - general bugs
        AssignedTo: jones at nceas.ucsb.edu
        ReportedBy: mob at msi.ucsb.edu
         QAContact: eml-dev at ecoinformatics.org


The EML documentation needs an update to reflect correct practice when
including a taxonomic species name. Taxonomically speaking, the 'species name'
is a genus and the specific epithet. But looking at it from a strictly
hierarchical node structure the specific epithet looks and acts like the other
nodes. However a node 'alterniflora' has no taxon rank by itself.

LTER already reccommends this construction in its Best Practices, but actual
implementations are inconsistent, perhaps because of the normative
documentation.

Another note: The normative docs also seem to refer to "Acer rubrum" as the
'common name' of Red Maple, which is incorrect.. 


Here is an example of 2 implementations sent to eml-dev (from Wade Sheldon):


with binomial:

<taxonomicClassification>
    <taxonRankName>Genus</taxonRankName>
    <taxonRankValue>Spartina</taxonRankValue>
    <taxonomicClassification>
       <taxonRankName>Species</taxonRankName>
       <taxonRankValue>Spartina alterniflora</taxonRankValue>
    </taxonomicClassification>
</taxonomicClassification>


without binomial:

<taxonomicClassification>
    <taxonRankName>Genus</taxonRankName>
    <taxonRankValue>Spartina</taxonRankValue>
    <taxonomicClassification>
       <taxonRankName>Species</taxonRankName>
       <taxonRankValue>alterniflora</taxonRankValue>
    </taxonomicClassification>
</taxonomicClassification>

Here is the text from the EML 2.1.1 normative docs:
(http://knb.ecoinformatics.org/software/eml/eml-2.1.1/eml-coverage.html)
seem to suggest the opposite approach:

"The name representing the taxonomic rank of the taxon being described.
The values included may be referenced from an authoritative source such
as the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS)in the U.S.
(http://www/itis.usda.gov) and in Canada
(http://sis.agr.gc.ca/pls/itisca/taxaget). Also, Species2000 is another
source of taxonomic information, found at (http://www.sp2000.org)
Example(s):
Acer would be an example of a genus rank value, and rubrum would be an
example of a species rank value, together indicating the common name of
red maple. It is recommended to start with Kingdom and include ranks
down to the most detailed level possible."

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.ecoinformatics.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA Contact for the bug.