Heads up: Some or all of the identifications affected by
this split may have been replaced with identifications of Formica. This
happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the
output taxa.
Review identifications of Formica rufa 1254127
Note: F. uralensis has also been placed into a complex by itself, but is not being included in the split to avoid pulling many Eurasian observations to genus level.
This change ought also to establish the Formica microgyna group or complex as an entity among the North American phylogenetic sister group of the now more restricted Formica rufa group or complex.
The Formica microgyna group already exists on iNat, under the name Complex Formica difficilis. It wasn't included in the split because the difficilis group is already it's own separate taxon, and it wouldn't need its records updated because of this change.
Unintended disagreements occur when a parent (B) is
thinned by swapping a child (E) to another part of the
taxonomic tree, resulting in existing IDs of the parent being interpreted
as disagreements with existing IDs of the swapped child.
Identification
ID 2 of taxon E will be an unintended disagreement with ID 1 of taxon B after the taxon swap
If thinning a parent results in more than 10 unintended disagreements, you
should split the parent after swapping the child to replace existing IDs
of the parent (B) with IDs that don't disagree.
This change ought also to establish the Formica microgyna group or complex as an entity among the North American phylogenetic sister group of the now more restricted Formica rufa group or complex.