Clements, J. F., T. S. Schulenberg, M. J. Iliff, S. M. Billerman, T. A. Fredericks, J. A. Gerbracht, D. Lepage, B. L. Sullivan, and C. L. Wood. 2021. The eBird/Clements checklist of Birds of the World: v2021. Downloaded from https://www.birds.cornell.edu/clementschecklist/download/ (Link)
I've got a question about this swap, and the related one for the other subspecies in this newly circumscribed species (https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/124235). Many, if not most observations for both of these taxa (lilianae and auropectoralis) are initially identified as Sturnella magna. Would it be worth atlasing and changing those identifications as well? The vast majority can be assigned based on locality, as there is basically no distributional overlap between the species.
Unintended disagreements occur when a parent (B) is
thinned by swapping a child (E) to another part of the
taxonomic tree, resulting in existing IDs of the parent being interpreted
as disagreements with existing IDs of the swapped child.
Identification
ID 2 of taxon E will be an unintended disagreement with ID 1 of taxon B after the taxon swap
If thinning a parent results in more than 10 unintended disagreements, you
should split the parent after swapping the child to replace existing IDs
of the parent (B) with IDs that don't disagree.
I've got a question about this swap, and the related one for the other subspecies in this newly circumscribed species (https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/124235). Many, if not most observations for both of these taxa (lilianae and auropectoralis) are initially identified as Sturnella magna. Would it be worth atlasing and changing those identifications as well? The vast majority can be assigned based on locality, as there is basically no distributional overlap between the species.