Thanks Gurcharan ji for your efforts. Being a global database, and also 'done on a voluntary basis', TPL may have its own difficulties and limitations. Being a regular user of TPL, I am shocked to know that it is 'static' and not dynamic.
I wonder if TPL can be open to us at eFI so that we can contribute by editing/updating its records wherever possible. Of course, the edits will be peer-reviewed by TPL before being finally published in the database. Regards Vijayasankar ------------------------------------------------------------------- Vijayasankar Raman, Ph.D. National Center for Natural Products Research University of Mississippi On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Gurcharan Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear friends > Here is the response which should help members to decide how much we > expect from the Second Version of The Plant List. > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: tpl_edit <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 7:34 PM > Subject: RE: New version of The Plant List > To: Bob Allkin <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]> > Cc: tpl_edit <[email protected]> > > > Dear Dr Singh, thanks for your comments. I just wanted to add to the > response of my colleague regarding the limitations of the Plant list. We > have always tried to be open about these and in the next version we have > added the following paragraph to the ‘about’ pages of the next version. > Thanks again for all your comments. Best wishes, Alan > Limitations > > The Plant List is not perfect and represents work in progress. Data comes > from a variety of sources which are both monographic (global) and regional > in scope. These data sources vary in the extent to which comprehensive > synonymy is included, their stage of development (proximity to publication) > and the degree to which they have been exposed to peer review. The Plant > List indicates the confidence which can be given to the status of a > particular name record using a star > rating<http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/about/#confidence>. > Around 20% of names are > unresolved<http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/about/#unresolved>indicating that, > considered collectively, the data sources included > provided insufficient evidence as to whether the name should be treated as > accepted <http://www.theplantlist.org/1.1/about/#accepted> or not. > > The Plant List is static. It is neither updated regularly from the > original data sources, nor edited directly. Data was extracted from source > databases in May 2012 and thus records included here may differ from their > current equivalent records in the source database from which they were > taken. Where you suspect errors in The Plant List, please first check the > source databases where corrections may have already been made. Feedback and > corrections pertaining to records in The Plant List are passed on to the > source database for consideration. If accepted by the source database they > may be incorporated in a future version of The Plant List. We do not edit > or revise the content of The Plant List directly. > > There exist other reliable authoritative sources of taxonomic opinion for > some groups or some regions which we simply did not have the time or > resources to include in this version of The Plant List. Our ambition is > for future versions to be more inclusive and comprehensive. Although The > Plant List may be the most comprehensive single information resource > covering all plants, it is imperfect and not all the taxonomic decisions > contained derive from a peer reviewed, curated, authoritative source. The > Plant List therefore should only be treated as advisory. Other, more > authoritative lists may exist for particular regions or taxa. > > > > > > Dr Alan Paton > > Assistant Keeper, Biodiversity Information and Economic Botany > > Herbarium, Library, Art and Archives > > Royal Botanic Gardens Kew > > TW9 3AB > > UK > > +44 (0)208 332 5295 > > > > *From:* Bob Allkin > *Sent:* 23 November 2013 16:52 > *To:* [email protected] > *Cc:* tpl_edit > *Subject:* FW: New version of The Plant List > > > > > > Dear Dr Singh > > > > your email was forwarded to me. > > We are pleased that you find TPL useful. We are painfully aware of its > limitations. > > > > We know that the second version will be a great improvement on Version 1. > It is currently delayed for a week for want of some extra computer memory. > However we are equally certain that it will not resolve all of your > correction and wishes. Some of the issues you raise are better handled than > before but not perfectly. We are only able to present data as sent to us. > > > > All corrections sent to us will have been forwarded to the owner/editor of > the database from which that record derives. Whether or not those > suggestions were included in the database I cannot tell. We have ambitions > for making TPL very much better but the whole project is done on a > voluntary basis. If you have suggestions as to how we might find resources > to improve it then I would be delighted to hear from you > > > > thanks for your interest and please do continue to send corrections we > will forward to the relevant institution. > > best regards > > Bob > > > > Dr Bob Allkin > > Information Products Manager, > > RBG Kew, TW9 4AB > > > ------------------------------------------- > From: Gurcharan Singh[SMTP:[email protected]] > > Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 4:10:11 AM > To: tpl_edit; [email protected] > Subject: New version of The Plant List > Auto forwarded by a Rule > > Dear sir > > With the release of The Plant List in 2010 taxonomists around the world > were greatly relieved with the hope of finding accepted names at one place. > Unfortunately there were more conflicts than solutions. I have already sent > more than 1000 corrections in seven separate mails. Hope these are others > communicated by rest of the taxonomic community are taken care of in > compiling the second list which as we understand would be online shortly. > > Following need urgent attention in the second list > > 1. Long list of unresolved names. > > 2. Listing of several subspecies and varieties (which is always welcome) > but not mentioning the autonym. > > 2. Mention of autonyms (Brassica juncea subsp. juncea) but no other > subspecies or variety is listed as accepted name. An autonym is created > only when some other subspecies or variety is recognised. When we don't > recognise any other subspecies, B. juncea subsp. juncea is redundant. > > 3. several cases of name combinations (there are thousands of examples in > the First List) where no synonym is listed, not even the basionym. > > 4. Numerous examples in which author name is given after the autonym > epithet, It is well known fact that autonyms are automatically created and > won't bear author name. > > > > > Dr. Gurcharan Singh > > Retired Associate Professor > SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007 > Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018. > Phone: 011-25518297 Mob: 9810359089 > > http://www.gurcharanfamily.com/ > http://people.du.ac.in/~singhg45/ > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "efloraofindia" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "efloraofindia" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/indiantreepix. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
