Anarhynchus. This
happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the
output taxa.
Review identifications of Charadrius mongolus 4785
Taxonomic Split 133048
(Submetido em 31-10-2023)
|
|
dividido em |
|
Comentários
@donalddavesne @rjq Ok, we can discuss committing this now. This one is stuff split, due to the ambiguous nature of wintering range and vagrancy, so take a moment to review and if it all looks good...
Here's what the analyses say right now:
Total: 2379 obs
Tibetan: 103 obs
Siberian: 110 obs
Outside Ranges: 81 obs
Overlap Ranges: 107 obs
Checking the "outside ranges" I found a few places that weren't in the atlas, like Shanghai and Macao.
Let's review these several times before validating
Also what about NE China and Mongolia? Shouldn't that be mongolus as well?
These are the ebird overlap areas: For the moment, records in the following regions have been unchanged by eBird Central (although some may be refined in the coming weeks with feedback from local experts): Mongolia, most of China (except Xizang and Qinhai = Tibetan and the coast from Fujian north = Siberian); note that coastal records from Guangdong south likely involve Siberian primarily, Macao and Hong Kong, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Borneo, Sulawesi, Lesser Sundas, Cocos and Keeling Islands.
So @rjq would you validate the switch? Sounds fine to me, but I'm neither an expert on these birds nor an experienced validator.
Have adjusted the atlases according to the eBird text. I think it’s OK to commit now
Sounds good to me!
Hi @birdwhisperer don't you think it would be better to first switch C. mongolus to A. mongolus?
This way, the uncertainly ID'd specimens would still be under Anarhynchus, unless I'm mistaken?
EDIT: I checked the ID analysis tool and it seems that everything will end up being Anarhynchus. All is good then :)