[API-users] Mismatch in species count

Markus Döring mdoering at gbif.org
Thu Apr 6 14:50:42 CEST 2017

Hi Srini,

the species count on the species page represents the species our backbone taxonomy contains for this phylum regardless whether we have occurrences or not.
The distinct species in your occurrences are less cause for some species we do not have any evidence.
Btw, in the upcoming portal you can see the list of distinct, accepted species right away:
https://demo.gbif.org/occurrence/species?taxon_key=79 (select species instead of table view)


On 4 Apr 2017, at 18:06, Srini Anand <srianand at umail.iu.edu<mailto:srianand at umail.iu.edu>> wrote:

I'm a student from Indiana University, working towards a Masters in Data Science. As part of a class project, we are working with the team from Global Biointeractions (GloBI) to compare how much their data covers the known species list. To that end we are using GBIF as the reference system.

I have worked out the details of navigating your site and extracting information for us to compare against. However, I'm unable to reconcile counts between the download and what I see on the species page.

Mismatch in species count
Using Kingdom = Archaea and Phylum = Crenarchaeota<http://www.gbif.org/species/79>, I navigated to the Occurrences page and downloaded the 3,824 occurrences. When I extract unique Species from this list, there are 59, whereas the main page indicates there should be 68.

I see a similar issue with
a) Kingdom = Archaea (should be 523, see 485)
b) Class = Pinopsida (should be 2,366 species, but see 983)

There is probably a small and obvious mistake I'm making, but not sure I know how to identify that.

Any guidance would be must appreciated.

Srini Anand
Masters of Data Science student
srianand at indiana.edu<mailto:srianand at indiana.edu>
API-users mailing list
API-users at lists.gbif.org<mailto:API-users at lists.gbif.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.gbif.org/pipermail/api-users/attachments/20170406/02220043/attachment.html>

More information about the API-users mailing list