|
dividido en |
@jameskm cool, I didn't know atlasing was a thing. What's up with the blue dots (Megacollybia platyphylla) in North America? I suppose the taxa on the right and number of observations should reflect what will happen after the splitting, and the map reflects this as well. They just don't seem to line up, which is confusing to me.
The numbers and dots are everything as it is now. Once committed, everything identified as Megacollybia platyphylla will be switched to another name based on the atlases. Everything in Europe will be M. platyphylla for instance, but in Texas, where both texensis and rodmanii are found, observations should get kicked up to Megacollybia. Mostly I am looking to make sure the atlases look okay. I think I have most observations accounted for, except the southern/southeast Asian ones.
Am I correct in thinking all those European M. platyphylla as input would become ambiguous in the output? i.e., the output layer for platyphylla contains no dots.
Is that because of the overlap of marginata/platyphylla sensu stricto? But then in Asia the sequence data indicate there is clitocyboidea and marginata so unique mapping of marginata is equally ambiguous - unless these things look very different. I haven't investigated.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funbio.2019.03.004 Ah, I see this paper has it from the Czech Republic.
@aldendirks and @cooperj, does this split look good to you? I tried to atlas the species as best I could.