Heads up: Some or all of the identifications affected by this split may have been replaced with identifications of Lupinus. This happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the output taxa. Review identifications of Lupinus microcarpus densiflorus 57058

Taxonomic Split 110826 (Committed on 06-10-2022)

As per POWO and ITIS, Lupinus microcarpus var. densiflorus (Benth.) Jeps. is a synonym of L. densiflorus Benth: https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:145539-2

Added by jeremygilmore on May 17, 2022 06:06 PM | Committed by cgbc on June 10, 2022
split into


I'm committing this change as it's accepted by iNat's taxonomic authorities on plants [POWO, COL] and fixes the current standing of there being 2 active taxa for the same one taxon.

I hadn't seen this problem before 2022 but a lot of recent plant splits are being done by just adding the new full species without swapping/inactivating the old taxon, leaving 2 active taxa on iNat for the same thing.

Thanks @jeremygilmore!

Posted by cgbc 10 months ago (Flag)

A taxon change like this one should only have one output taxon rather than the species and one of its infraspecies. It seems to have bumped some IDs all the way up to genus instead of species and may need to be reverted by staff.


Posted by bouteloua 10 months ago (Flag)

Yes, you're right; in going through all IDs that were updated, it bumped most Canadian identifications to genus-level, though all USA identifications however were swapped correctly. I've manually IDed all of the Canadian observations that were bumped back to genus to the sole L. densiflorus variety present (var. densiflorus). I think this may have been an Atlas issue; no USA identifications were bumped to genus (all correctly to L. densiflorus), and not all Canadian observations were affected.

Posted by cgbc 10 months ago (Flag)

Eish, my bad. I went through those Canadian observations from around Victoria and helped push them up to Lupinus densiflorus var. densiflorus, so they're all fixed now.

Posted by jeremygilmore 10 months ago (Flag)

unfortunately many people's identifications were altered so it probably would have been better to have staff revert the change.

it also looks like the rest of the taxon changes still need to be completed


Posted by bouteloua 10 months ago (Flag)

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments