Species Complexes in Asilidae
I'm considering adding a few species complexes to the iNat taxonomy for Asilidae, particularly for North American Laphria and Efferia. Is this something that people would find useful? Does anyone have reservations about unranked taxa?
Which complexes would you like to see added?
iNat guidelines for complexes:
https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#complexes
Some discussions about species complexes for reference:
https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/346662
https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/331324
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/how-are-species-complexes-treated/404
Three complexes added so far:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894751-Laphria-canis
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894742-Laphria-sericea
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894746-Laphria-index
To find a complex, search for the species name included in the respective link above, and the complex will be one of the two choices.
Comments
@robcannings @tristanmcknight @giffbeaton @stevecollins @b_coulter @pbedell @quaedfliegh @caterpillarofsociety
Very useful, instead of Laphria sp. we can narrow it down to more useful ID's. e.g. Laphria aktis/sericea and L. canis/sicula/winnemana..
Go for it, I think it is a good idea.
I think it's a good idea too, for photos not backed up by specimens. Another Laphria would be L index/ithypyga.
Okay, I've made three new complexes:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894751-Laphria-canis
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894742-Laphria-sericea
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894746-Laphria-index
The naming is a bit awkward, but I don't think there's much I can do about that.
EDIT: I've fixed the names
Looks good, how about just removing the first word "complex", having it repeat like that really does not roll off the tongue well.
That's what I meant by awkward. The "Complex" prefix is added by iNat, and I have no control over it.
The issue is that, for example, iNat treats "Laphria canis" as an existing name, so I can't use that name for the complex (e.g. Complex Laphria canis).
Are you sure? I was able to create this: https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/894751-Laphria-canis
Well that is just plain silly. Good job though.
Weird - maybe I was doing it wrong.
Now someone needs to do this for mushrooms.
Ok, I think I fixed the names
Looks good
Diogmites angustipennis / bilobatus / texanus would be another good one.
I was thinking the same thing. I'll make a new complex for that group in the near future.
A recent discussion about species complexes on another journal post brought up some points I would like to address here. @tristanmcknight @quaedfliegh @bradmoon @rogue_biologist
Tristan asked whether the computer vision suggestions have incorporated the Laphria species complexes (let's call these Phase 1). Looking at observations of the three complexes posted in July 2021, I would estimate that at least 40-50% of those had an initial CV suggestion for the relevant complex. So it appears that the CV has in fact incorporated our complexes and should do the same for future ones.
Tristan also mentioned his concerns about iNat species complex records be converted to s.s. species when imported into GBIF. This is certainly a data quality issue for GBIF, but personally I don't see this as our responsibility. I prefer to prioritize tools (like the species complex) that make identification more efficient for us on this platform.
I have compiled a list of candidate Phase 2 species complexes based on the discussion mentioned above. I consider this to be a second, broader trial phase to see how these taxa perform before opening the proverbial floodgates on species complexes. Let me know which complexes should be the highest priority to include in this phase. I will create these taxa once I've gotten some feedback on the list below. Also note that with this list we are beginning to stray from the curator guidelines in that many of these complexes are not named explicitly in the literature. If you see that as a problem let me know.
Phase 2
Complex Choerades marginata (dioctriaeformis, femorata, marginata, mouchai)
Complex Diogmites angustipennis (angustipennis, bilobatus)
Complex Efferia aestuans (aestuans, kondratieffi)
Complex Holcocephala abdominalis (abdominalis, fusca)
Complex Machimus chrysitis (chrysitis, chrysitis nigrofemoratus, fortis, subdolus)
Complex Promachus rufipes (hinei, rufipes) [especially useful for purported hybrid observations]
Complex Promachus bastardii (bastardii, dimidiatus, texanis, quadratus)
Complex Stenopogon junceus (cervinus, elongatus, junceus)
Edit: removed D. texanus from Complex Diogmites angustipennis
Complexes under consideration for Phase 3 and beyond:
Complex Atomosia puella (melanopogon, puella)
Complex Cerotainia macrocera (albipilosa, macrocera)
Complex Choerades fimbriata (castellanii, fimbriata, fulva)
Complex Dasypogon diadema (bacescui, diadema, gerardi, iberus, irinelae, kugleri, magisi, melanopterus, octonotatus, regenstreifi, tsacasi)
Complex Efferia tagax (tagax, neosimilis, incognita, sonorensis, armata)
Complex Efferia zonata (zonata, peralta, vertebrata, fisheri)
Complex Holopogon phaeonotus (guttulus, phaeonotus
Complex Laphria vultur (vultur, asackeni).
Complex Machimus setibarbus (caliginosus, cyanopus, intermedius, setibarbus)
Complex Machimus concinnus (concinnus, nevadensis)
Complex Machimus notatus (notatus, virginicus)
Complex Proctacanthus rufus (hinei, rufus)
Complex Promachus aldrichii (aldrichii, nigrialbus)
Complex Promachus giganteus (giganteus, magnus, minisculus)
Complex Stichopogon trifasciatus (trifasciatus, coquilletti, venturiensis)
Add a Comment