iSpot has two vernacular names for Trachystemon orientalis - Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, rather than the one Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I suspect that the script which imported the names mistook the comma for a separator in a list, rather than as part of thename.
Thought Iâd look that one up in the source data from NBNâŠ
NHMSYS0000464510 is the NBN key for Trachystemon orientalis
That record has five matching entries in the vernacular names file:
Abraham-Isaac-Jacob (the preferred entry)
Abraham
Isaac and Jacob
Abraham Isaac a Jacob (Welsh)
Abraham-Isaac-Jacob (again!)
The iSpot database exactly reflects the above, so it appears the source data could do with a tweak.
Hi everyone, not sure if this is the right place to post this so apologies if not but it kind of links with a comment made by Dejay on 3rd August. I often have problems with the drop down dictionaries and knowing which scientific name to choose as there can be so many options. I try typing in both the common and scientific names at times but itâs still an issue. Some of this will undoubtedly be about my lack of knowledge which Iâm trying to improve, but it can be really confusing, and at times has put me off posting an observation. I attach a couple of examples - I always avoid anything that says sub species unless its something I definitely know, Are there any easy tips you can give me eg is anything after a backslash just a synonym? Please excuse my lack of knowledge in these matters - just want to obviously be as accurate as i can.
Sorry - just to clarify, i know about the genus and species and always make sure I know those before posting, so for example i know common nettle is urtica dioica - itâs just when there is something additional/different to that if that makes sense.
Basically, the botanical/zoological names after the pipe (vertical bar) (not a blackslash) can be ignored - theyâre there for people using old identification guides, etc. Just pick one with the common name that you want.
To put it another way - left of the pipe is the name iSpot uses; right of the pipe is a name someone else may be using.
1 Like
Thanks so much lavateraguy so in future Iâll just pick one. Thatâs so weird about the vertical bar as it must be something to do with the other words being in italics as it looks to me like a back slash 
!
Thatâs a plausible optical illusion - itâs rotated clockwise relative to near vertical lines in the italic font. I donât see it, but Iâm familiar with the use of the pipe (vertical bar) as a separator in various contexts (as an operator in various programming languages), so a vertical bar is what I expect to see.
However, set the mouse pointer on one, and then move the mouse pointer downwards, and you see that it is truely vertical. (And even in an italic font a backslash would slope to the left.)
The use of pipe as a name for a vertical bar is a UNIXism, arising from the use of the symbol to tell the command interpreter to pipe the output of one program to the input of another.
Cretaegus monogyna | Cretaegus monogyna (Hawthorn)
the name in brackets, where it occurs, is the Common name that will appear in the ID Panel, UNLESS you delete it or add one of your own. NOT all Scientific names have a Common Name
Thanks - to be fair now I know itâs vertical it does actually look vertical - amazing how the brain works isnât it!
Thanks for the info!
Funny, I had always thought that it was vertical but after reading your comment, it did appear to lean back slightly!
The main thing is to get the scientific name right. Many vernacular names are ambiguous or not widely accepted - I know Iâm old-fashioned but I just cannot get into some of the vernacular names for micromoths which seem to have appeared recently - and which often donât seem at all apt to me!!
I always thought the vernacular name for all micromoths was âvery small mothââŠ
.
I notice some vernacular names applied to bryophytes an small red seaweeds; often a translation of the latin/greek name and therefore of limited value, often confusingly similar and frequently not very intuitive. My current favourite is « Alpine Extinguisher-moss«. You need to know about Greek candle snuffers to understand it.
.
Was Encalypta once a moth?
.
But the whole trail has been enlightening.
.
Thanks to all.
I know - itâs strange isnât it. I guess to an extent you see what you expect to see. Iâm going try and âexpect to seeâ more money in my online bank statement and see how that works out
Thanks for the advice re scientific names - appreciated!
Good luck with that one!
When is an insect not an invertebrate? Apparently when itâs an âother organismâ.
Think this is a known issue and one that can be fixed when NHM prunes out a load of spare bits in the overall UK tree which they are doing. We could try doing it on the ispot version of the dictionary but would have to do it again when the dictionary is updated and there are lots of these odditites so where to stop.
Iâm not sure that I follow this. It seems strange to me that any reliable taxonomic source shouldnât recognise an insect as an invertebrate. I would wonder if the problem doesnât actually lie in the algorithm which - mistakenly - links the iSpot classification âother organismsâ with Insecta.
You also ask âwhere to stopâ: my answer would have to be âwhen all errors and anomalies have been eliminatedâ. To stop earlier is to accept error and inaccuracy which runs counter to any scientific training I have received.
The issue is that the UK overall species inventory is made up of very many separate dictionaries from the people that maintain each group of species. Each of these has errors and combined they have even more errors due to the way the trees are put together. The person who compiles these into one list that others use only has a limited amount of time to fix all these errors and new ones are appearing all the time.
See Missing Sector Spider (Zygiella x-notata) | Observation | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature
When I entered the scientific name as âZygiella x-notataâ by cutting and pasting from elsewhere, I was told âNo results foundâ. This continued as I deleted characters until I was left with just the genus at which point, lo and behold, I was offered âZygiella x-notata | Zygiella litterata; Zygiella x-notata | Zygiella similis; Zygiella x-notata | Zygiella x-notatusâ. Why wasnât I offered these immediately?
Interestingly, as I revisited the âAdd observationâ page to get the details for this post the same happened repeatedly but with the three synonyms in different orders. Iâd have expected them always to be taken straight from a list and offered in the same order.
I had a go at this too. Zygiella in the ID box gave all the options, but then adding an âxâ got No results found.
Further investigations - I only had to add Zygi and I got all the options.
.
This is interesting because I too have used a cutânâpast for the ID and been disappointed. Now I know to try just the genus as that might work.
p.s. I havenât got a Ziggy spider to post, but just tried it out; and am glad I did. We live and learn.