sounds a bit buggie to me and not overly helpful.
I tried from the common name side and entered Foxy and then Foxy Emperor, the stated name in our widely used Butterfly Field Guide (Steve Woodhall (2005) and it said there were no matches but eventually gave me Foxy Charaxes with the scientific name.
Yes: it is a bug. And once the dropdown list displays you cannot continue typing - you need to mouseclick on the box to type further. Definitely a bug.
The old iSpot refined the search as you typed more and more: it kept pace with the typing, without freezing the display and without locking you out of typing further.
The new system also does what the old did, and finds multiple matches. So type “Cha jas” and the matches will be found … most useful (one of the “bugs” - sensu DavidHowdon - that the programmers have fixed).
Further to my whingeing about the drop-downs for common or systematic name. I just posted a 22-Spot Ladybird: In the common name box (I had no idea of the scientific one), it offered no matches for “22”, or “Twenty-”. For “Twenty” all it could suggest was “Twenty-Plume Moth”.
I gave in and googled the systematic name to copy and paste.
Ten-Spot Ladybird is OK - did you try decreasing the number?
Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata is not easy to remember - though a part of it is.
Any advances on a hundred - Agave americana?
yes, Diplopoda…thousands
More?
“Ten-Spot Ladybird is OK - did you try decreasing the number?”
OK. Next time I will catch the beast, tippex out 12 of the spots and call it a ten-spot.
I wonder if it is a leading number thing. Searching for ‘10-’ to get ‘10-spot Ladybird’ does not work, although that is allowed as a vernacular name but searching for ‘ten-’ did get ‘ten-spot Ladybird’ an alternative version of the vernacular.
It looks like no word version of 22 is coded into the dictionary so if initial numbers are the problem that would explain it.
