[tcs-lc] Incertae Sedis

[Kennedy, Jessie]

I propose that we make this a discussion point for the next version. We
will add this to the Wiki as a discussion item. I would hope that we get
clarification from the taxonomists on this before we start changing the
schema or proposing ways of dealing with it when there are many ways to
interpret it.

 

Thanks to Rich for the summary of the interpretations of Incertae Sedis
- I've now added James' last interpretation and his options for dealing
with it.

 

Pyle:

A parent-child relationship between two Concepts where the difference
between the Ranks of the NameObjects attached to each of the two
Concepts exceeds some threshhold value -- either an absolute value
[e.g., skipping one of the "root" ranks], or an in-context value [e.g.,
most concepts in a treatment attached names of rank "X" link to parent
concepts attached to names of Rank "Y", except for a few that link to
parent concepts attached to names of ranks higher than "Y"].

 

Ytow:

Incertae sedis is whatever a taxonomist says it is -- i.e., if an author
uses it in a publication, then capture that information, regardless of
the author's meaning. 

Ytow2:

incertae sedis is a kind of hierarchical relationship between
TaxonConcepts of different ranks, although one of these TaxonConcepts
may or may not exist in the source databases depending on scope of the
database (and query?).

 

Kirk:

"Incertae sedis is just to neat term to ensure there are no gaps in
denormalized hierarchies - for people who like these" -- i.e., it is a
term used as a "placeholder" for a missing taxon that might otherwise be
considered a "mandatory"  [Do I have this right, Paul? Also, Jerry --
your second message seemed to indicate it as a placeholder of sorts for
a NameObject -- did I understand you correctly?]

 

Cooper1:

An indication by an author that a given taxon concept could not be
placed within any known parent taxon concept. [Do I have this right,
Jerry?]

 

Cooper2:

"it is simply an 'is parent of' concept relationship sensu the asserting
author" [identical to James' interpretation?]

 

Lyal:

"The statement is that the author recognises the taxon as a component of
the taxon hierarchical level within which it is incertae sedis, but
cannot place it within any of the taxa at the next hierarchical level
below." -- [similar to Richs' "in-context" interpretation, but for
practical purposes recorded according James' interpretation -- is that
about right, Chirs?]

 

Clearly, it seems, we have various interpretations of what "incertae
sedis" means when applied to a taxon concept (or relationship between
two concepts), and I imagine those interpretations listed above
represent only a small subset of the range of interpretations by the
many thousands of authors from whom we hope to capture taxon concept
instances.  So, a simple boolean flag wouldn't actually convey any
information about the concept; it would only convey that the author of
the concept applied this term (or one of some range of functional
equivalents, yet to be determined) to the named concept, and it would
require a reading of the original concept definition to understand in
what sense the term was used.

 

James' Options:

Option 0:  Ignore incertae sedis this time, may be documented our
recoginition though.

Option 1a: Add incertae sedis as to rlationship type enumeration.  It
may require data providers to create a dummy data say "Life".  We shall
see.

Option 1b: Add incertae sedis as to rlationship type enumeration, and
allow minOccur=0.

Option 2: Add incertae sedis as a subtype of "is parent of" and "is
child of".  It could be non-minor modification.

 

 


This message is intended for the addressee(s) only and should not be read, copied or disclosed to anyone else outwith the University without the permission of the sender.
It is your responsibility to ensure that this message and any attachments are scanned for viruses or other defects. Napier University does not accept liability for any loss
or damage which may result from this email or any attachment, or for errors or omissions arising after it was sent. Email is not a secure medium. Email entering the 
University's system is subject to routine monitoring and filtering by the University. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/tcs-lc/attachments/20050920/79ff495a/attachment.htm