Bridging Discrepancies across North American Butterfly Naming Authorities: Supporting Citizen
Science Data Integration
Dana L Campbell, Anne E Thessen, Leslie [email protected]
http://www.slideshare.net/athessen@diatomsRcool
The Data Detektiv
Acknowledgements
• DBI – 1052875• DEB - 1541557
Lepidopteran Monitoring
© Cláudio Dias Timm CC BY-NC-SA via Flickr and EOL
© 1999 California Academy of Sciences CC BY-NC-SA via CalPhotos and EOL
© michael_hodge CC BY via iNaturalist and EOL
By Andy Potter CC BY-SA via Wikimedia Commons and EOL
Lepidopteran Monitoring
Photo by Bernard Dupont
Bioindicator
© Ted Kropiewnicki CC BY-NC-SA via Tree of Life Web Project and EOL
Pollinator
Prey
Lepidopteran Monitoring
By Gail Gilliland, blogs.plos.org
wildresearch.ca
burrenbeo.com
By Kelly Donovan
Lepidopteran Monitoring
• North American Butterfly Monitoring Network
• Standardize protocols (Pollard Walk)
• Develop data management systems (PollardBase)
Lepidopteran Monitoring
Lepidopteran Classifications
• ITIS• NABA 2001• Pelham 2014• Opler & Warren 2005
Base List Number of taxa Number of species
Pelham 2827 820
Opler Warren 1043 784
NABA 1090 731
ITIS 2810 866
Subfamily Deviation
Genus Deviation
Lumping/Splitting Spelling Species
NameUnmatched
Taxon
ITIS/NABA 66 28 63 13 28 21
ITIS/OW 110 15 11 2 9 13
ITIS/Pelham 49 16 7 1 5 19
OW/NABA 69 34 62 11 22 17
OW/Pelham 159 28 13 3 14 27
NABA/Pelham 105 35 63 11 34 37
Project Lists
Project Start Year Base List Number of Species
Base List Species
DeviationsArea (sq mi)
Illinois 1986 NABA 143 4 7,000
Michigan 2011 NABA 136 2 97,000
Colorado 2013 OW 244 22 104,000
Tennessee 2014 NABA 136 8 42,000
Irvine Ranch 2012 OW 80 8 50,000 acres
Cascades 2011 Pelham 152 4Iowa 2007 NABA 119 2 56,000
Florida 2003 OW 192 8 66,000MPG Ranch Pelham 101 15
Ohio 1995 NABA 165 7 45,000
Project Lists
Project Species Complex Spelling Generic Species
nameUnmatched
TaxonLumping/Splitting Total
Illinois 2 2 1 0 1 0 6
Michigan 1 1 0 0 0 0 2
Colorado 0 2 12 1 7 0 22
Tennessee 2 1 5 0 0 0 8
Irvine Ranch 0 0 1 0 6 1 8
Cascades 0 0 1 1 0 2 4Iowa 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
Florida 0 0 4 0 3 1 8MPG Ranch 4 2 3 0 0 6 15
Ohio 0 4 1 0 1 1 7Total 9 12 30 2 18 11 80
Doing the Alignment• Manual alignment of the four
base lists• Projects declared a base list and
recorded discrepancies• Used nomenclature and
geography
Celastrina ladon complexRed = C. ladonBlue = C. luciaGreen = C. neglectaPurple = C. idellaGrey = C. echoYellow = C. humulus
Data Access
• Manual alignments• Darwin Core Archive• https://github.com/diatomsRcool/butterfly
Data Integration
• MPG Ranch Speyeria hesperis• Equivalent in Ohio?
Speyeria hesperisMPG Ranch
Speyeria hesperisPelham
Speyeria atlantis hesperisNABA
Speyeria atlantisOhio
Data Integration
• Colorado Adelpha eulalia• Equivalent in Cascades?
Adelpha eulaliaColorado
Adelpha bredowiiO&W
Adelpha californicaAdelpha eulalia
Pelham
Adelpha californicaCascades
© Jerry Oldenettel CC BY-NC-SA via EOL and Fickr
Conclusions
• Local projects and citizen scientists are important for Lepidopteran monitoring
• Large-scale problems require data integration across projects
• We successfully built crosswalks between four classifications and ten project lists
• Names infrastructure for integrating butterfly data
Questions?
CC BY-NC via Flickr and EOL