Updating existing data david usda glucose validating bachelor in mexico
I wouldn't be surprised if someone looked at the Chinese subsp. POWO might have deliberately excluded the Chinese populations, but I didn't spot them present under a species name on the genus page.
I may have been mistaken assuming hispidum as the epithet, so I don't have a firm conclusion either way.
TPL claims that the Pankhurst database will be rolled into WCSP, but when searching WCSP directly it still has no records for Prunus.
Pankhurst's database may have been incorporated into POWO (POWO does attribute Prunus records to WCSP).
Pretend that I know nothing about the online databases, please. Prunus has a more-or-less worldwide distribution, so regional databases aren't likely to be useful.
The more I think about it, the more I think that Po WO is the only source likely to be at all reliable – unless there are any Rosaceae experts here who know better.
My view is that you have to choose the apparently most reliable, say clearly in the article "As of DATE, MAIN_SOURCE accepts: As to which database is currently most reliable for Prunus, I'm not sure – for some large genera there just isn't a reliable database.Basically covers species comprehensively (garbage included). Does not cover species comprehensively outside of North America. WCSP: Curated independently from any other database.