Heads up: Some or all of the identifications affected by this split may have been replaced with identifications of Otospermophilus. This happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the output taxa. Review identifications of Otospermophilus beecheyi 180007

Taxonomic Split 135004 (Committed on 23-09-2024)

DO NOT COMMIT - LARGE NUMBER OF OBS

Otospermophilus douglasii has been elevated to a full species, accepted in MDD
https://academic.oup.com/biolinnean/article/113/4/1136/2416020
https://academic.oup.com/mspecies/article/48/939/91/2687779

ASM Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) (Citation)
Added by rjq on 23 November, 2023 11:20 | Committed by cnddb_brian on 23 September, 2024
split into

Comments

I believe this outlines the basis for the taxonomic change and the range map adjustments, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zaKja9z-rN6tgsJ8dkYy-DQm8YMkcyyo/view?usp=drive_link

Posted by cnddb_brian 8 months ago
Posted by birdwhisperer about 1 month ago

@loarie please can this be committed, thanks

Posted by rjq 25 days ago

Subspecies swap (O. b. douglasii to O. douglasii) https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_swaps/135021

Posted by cnddb_brian 4 days ago

What's the story with Sacramento County? All of the observations were kicked back to genus. This should be part of O. beecheyi, right? Or am I missing something?

Posted by alexbinck 4 days ago

Thanks for the heads-up @alexbinck, I'll review them. I'm not sure what happened. O. beecheyi was atlased for Sac County, https://www.inaturalist.org/atlases/12. Ah, the atlas for O. douglasii was messed-up (https://www.inaturalist.org/atlases/98999); it included Sac County (and Nevada County). I'll take the blame for this, but not sure how it happened, but this was all set it up and reviewed it last year (whoops!). Sorry.
~Brian

Posted by cnddb_brian 4 days ago

Add a Comment

Sign In or Sign Up to add comments