You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Unplaced as a new taxonomic status is relevant for many datasets. It is more intuitive than bare name. Are any taxon properties such as extinct needed? Or is unplaced synonymous to bare name?
The taxonomic status vocabulary might need a broader discussion, e.g. how to deal with invalid and doubtful names. WFO also uses unchecked (A name that has not been checked by the contributing TEN) and ambiguous (A name that has been checked by the contributing TEN but could not be resolved as accepted or synonym).
Unplaced as a new taxonomic status is relevant for many datasets. It is more intuitive than bare name. Are any taxon properties such as extinct needed? Or is unplaced synonymous to bare name?
Current 5 taxonomic status values: http://api.checklistbank.org/vocab/taxonomicstatus
2 being accepted:
accepted
&provisionally accepted
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: