On 01 Feb 2016, at 09:22, Roderic Page <Roderic.Page@glasgow.ac.uk> wrote:
Looks like the issue is with GBIF’s handling of data, rather than the data source itself._______________________________________________
For the subgenus we have http://api.gbif.org/v1/species/100969508:
"scientificName":"Ficus (Diconoficus)”,"canonicalName":”Ficus”,"authorship":" (Diconoficus)”
so the subgenus has mistakenly been treated as the authorship of the name.
For the species, GBIF ignores subgenera and so regards Ficus gayana as the canonical name.
Regards
Rod
---------------------------------------------------------
Roderic Page
Professor of Taxonomy
Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine
College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences
Graham Kerr Building
University of Glasgow
Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
Email: Roderic.Page@glasgow.ac.uk
Tel: +44 141 330 4778
Skype: rdmpage
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/rdmpage
LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/rdmpage
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rdmpage
Blog: http://iphylo.blogspot.com
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7101-9767
On 31 Jan 2016, at 23:32, Nozomi James Ytow <nozomi@biol.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
Diconoficus
API-users mailing list
API-users@lists.gbif.org
http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users