Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Things that we missed?

Glad to have any feedback or suggestions on how to make the MDD better, especially in areas of:
- Taxonomic changes we missed or are inaccurate as posted [but use the 'new species' discussion for new things]
- Errors in page loading or download of searched taxonomies
- General suggestions how to improve the site

Comments

  • Hello all, I see no common names of some octodontid species. In example Octodon pacificus (Pacific degu) and Pipanacotomys aureus (Golden viscacha rat). Following the Handbook of Mammals of World Vol 6, the correct name of Tympanoctomys barrerae is Red Viscacha Rat. I can provide a picture of the species T. barrerae, if an original photo is necessary.

  • Hey Andrea! Cool, we are working on updating common names globally according to those used in the HMW series (not available digitally, so we are asking the editors for that). But great point that we lack a photo of Tympa-- are you willing to upload one to Mammal Images Library? https://www.mammalsociety.org/mammal-images-library-submission-form
    (I have some I could upload, but yours are likely better!)
    Thanks, --nate

  • Great! I will upload one.
    Best,

  • edited February 2018

    Hello everyone,
    First, congratulations on this very important effort. I have a few comments on Callitrichidae monkeys:
    - Mico manicorensis is not considered a valid species (see https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10764-014-9766-4)
    - Leontocebus is not considered a valid genus (see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1055790317302762?via=ihub)
    - a minor issue: the correct combination of Saguinus ursulus is Saguinus ursula (this form was the originally proposed by Hoffmannsegg)
    Best,

  • Great resource. I understand that common names will be added or revised in near future based on MSW. Should we refrain for the time being from providing corrections to existing common names? What about other errors or omissions we see right now for particular species -- do we simply post such comments here, as some already have done, or is there another way to flag such species accounts?

  • OK awesome-- thanks guys!
    - @ggarbino I'll alert our team to work on these changes to the list; we're still adding things post-August 2017 but should have caught that Mico manicorensis
    - @JNStuart Our plan is to incorporate HMW common names (right now we are working on getting a digital listing from the publishers). Also future plans to add a "flag species" option on individual pages-- for now though, this Forum is the place to highlight things

  • @ggarbino Thanks for letting us know about these changes! I know Leontocebus has had some controversy over its recognition, and based of the publication you attached, it will be included in Saguinus in our next version. The same goes for Mico manicorensis. I was wondering however about the spelling of Saguinus ursulus/ursula. Based on the masculine ending of Saguinus, shouldn't the ending of 'ursula' be changed to 'ursulus'?

  • hi @connorburgin1 ! Yes, Saguinus is to be treated as a male noun. However, the description by Hoffmannsegg suggests that "ursula" was a noun as apposition, thus it would not decline.
    We discuss this here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1055790317302762?via=ihub

  • @ggarbino That would seem to be the case! I will include it as S. ursula in the next update.

  • This looks like it will be a great resource. I have a quick comment on a common name, and maybe it applies to a general problem. I looked up Microtus californicus. It shows the common name is the Amargosa vole. However, that is the common name of only 1 of ~16 subspecies. IUCN shows the English common names as "Amargosa Vole, California Vole". Seems like a better curated list of names would be good.
    Another thing is that on the map, there are large circles for georeffed specimens that have no error associated with them. This is helpful for me, as a good deal of these are mine! But, for the casual user, it would be helpful to have a button to click that would explain the source of the points, the size of the grey circle, etc.
    For any record, it would also be great to have an immediate way to help correct the data. I know on the map you can click through to the original sources. But would be really neat to have a way to send comments to editors, or museum curators.

Sign In or Register to comment.