User:MargaretRDonald/sandbox/Range map for ''Macrozamia riedlei''

Range map for Macrozamia riedlei
Different range maps are used in the following two versions of the article Macrozamia riedlei: Macrozamia riedlei'' (oldid=875850228) the map of which is shown in Map 1., and Macrozamia riedlei (oldid=875873175) the map of which is shown in Map 2.

These two maps differ significantly: The first uses the downloaded data from The Australasian Virtual Herbarium – Occurrence data for Macrozamia riedlei, downloaded via the, a download and a map which contains details of all the specimens of Macrozamia riedlei held in Australasian herbaria The second derives from the map in FloraBase for Macrozamia riedlei with the referenced map being based on specimens from the PERTH herbarium only.

Both maps derive from well respected reference sources, but they show slightly different things, with the referenced map from FloraBase using a subset of the Australasian Virtual Herbarium data. The maps differ significantly, and their differences need to be resolved before one map is preferred to the other.

Data Quality Variables
The data download from the AVH map included all the AVH curated data quality variables. The following variables were checked for all data with spatial coordinates: coordinates are out of range for species, Cultivated / escapee, Habitat incorrect for species, Suspected outlier. (Apparently) no specimen record failed these tests. However, despite downloading the AVH data quality variables, the variable, DETECTED_OUTLIER_JACKKNIFE was not downloaded (but may or may not be visible on inspection of the record using the map), and it was found that all the easterly points (listed below) failed this test for a moisture index.

Comparisons with stated IHRA regions and subregions given in FloraBase
The following table was found by clicking on the easternmost West Austalian points in The Australasian Virtual Herbarium – Occurrence data for Macrozamia riedlei Note that they all occur in the Esperance Plains IBRA region, a region in which they are said to be found in the FloraBase for Macrozamia riedlei. (Note that the article for Esperance Plains shows agricultural land lying between these apparent easternmost outliers and the points in its westerly parts. Each of these points has been detected as an outlier based on a moisture index (CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences) using a reverse jackknife algorithm (Atlas of Living Australia).

The second table gives a summary of the data which had spatial coordinates, and where specimens were collected in Australia (from The Australasian Virtual Herbarium – Occurrence data for Macrozamia riedlei)

Thus we can see that a map made from only PERTH data, neglects the information given by a further 193 specimens held by other Australasian herbaria. Map 3. shows just what we have missed. The blue points in Map 3 show records held by CANB (the Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research), and show that the range appears to be slightly more northerly than the range shown in Map 2. Scientists who exclude data without giving reasons are rightly castigated.

Reasons should be given here, too, for a decision made which excludes half the data. (The NSW points shown in Map 3. should be excluded because these are outside the native range as given by FloraBase and other sources.)

The description in FloraBase for Macrozamia riedlei gives the IBRA Regions: Esperance Plains, Jarrah Forest, Swan Coastal Plain, Warren; the IBRA Subregions: Fitzgerald, Northern Jarrah Forest, Perth, Southern Jarrah Forest, Warren; and Local Government Areas (LGAs): Albany, Armadale, Augusta-Margaret River, Beverley, Boddington, Boyup Brook, Bridgetown-Greenbushes, Busselton, Capel, Collie, Cranbrook, Denmark, Donnybrook-Balingup, Gosnells, Harvey, Kalamunda, Mandurah, Manjimup, Mundaring, Murray, Nannup, Northam, Plantagenet, Serpentine-Jarrahdale, Swan, Toodyay, Wandering, Waroona, West Arthur, Williams, York.

Using the capacity to select parts of the AVH map, together with its capacity to filter on IBRA regions and subregions, the easterlymost points in the Esperance Plains IBRA region are found to be in the Recherche subregion, which is not listed in the Florabase description.

The two most northerly points MEL 0033468A and CBG 9711554.1 are in the Lesueur Sandplain IBRA subregion, which is not listed in the FloraBase description. However, all the points excluded from Map 2 and included in Map 1 belong to IBRA regions listed in the FloraBase description. It remains unclear whether the most northerly and most easterly points are excluded from the FloraBase description because only PERTH data were used in making that description, or are excluded by intent. (However, an email sent to me by a curator of Florabase indicates that the maps in Florabase are based solely on PERTH data.)

Conclusions
Map 2. is probably to be preferred since the jackknife tests on a moisture variables how the most easterly points of Map 1. are outliers, and that some of the more northerly points of Map 1 are also outliers. The fact that a point is marked as a detected outlier may be insufficient for its exclusion: a competent botanist would need to check the specimens themselves. Map 1 contains points which are not in the IBRA subregions listed by Florabase but this is irrelevant to the argument since the subregions listed were based on PERTH specimens only. Therefore it remains unclear whether Map 2 is to be preferred.

Futher discussion/vandalism

 * See history of Thysanotus patersonii in particular, edits from 3/04/2019 to 4/04/2019
 * Talk:Ficus coronata For a useful and productive way of excluding potentially misleading points.
 * Reliable sources/Noticeboard Ironic that the link to occurrence data map from Australasian Virtual Herbarium should have been the mechanism for alerting me to the error in the distribution given in the article forThysanotus patersonii, an error which had stood for more than 10 year since the article's creation. At 14:03 2 April 2019, I inserted the link to the occurrence data. At 14:06 2 April 2019 I made the change in the talk page discussing the incorrect distribution (which included Queensland and the Northern Territory). At 14:39 2 April 2019, the distribution was corrected using a book source (which was not checkable by me, and which had been available for some while, without the distribution having been corrected). Concerned that the distribution remarks had been made and lasted, it seemed that there had to have been a source for them which is why I had contacted the article's creator (14:14 2 April 2019) and why I added three further sentences referencing three Australian efloras together with the map, which apparently accords with the book reference given and with the South Australian eflora. The occurrence data explained that at least one source agreed with the original statement, and added weight to the correction which had been made. A few moments later, I observed the last sentence referring to AVH data had been deleted with the comment that AVH data were BS.
 * A line
 * Documentation
 * Hi Cas Could you take a look at Macrozamia riedlei and the associated talk page (Some earlier discussion)
 * Commons
 * Talk:Macrozamia riedlei
 * Talk:Anigozanthos preissii Occurrence data versus range map