Thumb

Neotropic Cormorant ( Phalacrocorax brasilianus)

The species I am observing is a bird. I notice this bird has an odd shape, different from most other birds. I notice the shape of the birds stomach is more flat then rounded-almost like a chicken. The birds neck has a lump in the middle and the head itself is like a snakes head, flat and opal. The birds feathers are mostly black but there are some white feathers on the wings, end tail and one little stripe of white feathers on the head by the beak and eye. I notice the birds feet are black too. The bird eyes are blue and the beak is flat and white and yellow. The bird is standing on a rock looking out on the water, I wonder if this bird eats fish. I wonder what the bird is waiting for. It's blue eye reminds me of the blue butterfly painting in my room. I wonder if this bird can only be found in Tucson. The bird was observed on Jan 18, 2021 at 5:22 PM, it was clear skies at Reid Park, Tucson, AZ, USA. The scientific classification is this bird is Phalacrocorax brasilianus.

Ingresado el 23 de enero de 2021 por dshosie11 dshosie11 | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Green

I love the green Roadbank Ferns that come up in the winter!

Ingresado el 23 de enero de 2021 por carolralph carolralph | 3 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

California Natural Diversity Database Blog- Art of Biodiversity

A shout out to the California Natural Diversity Database for featuring my art on their blog today.
Thanks CNDDB!
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/News

Ingresado el 23 de enero de 2021 por ocean_beach_goth ocean_beach_goth | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Winter pond record 3

These are just extra notes on what species/hybrids I caught today and how many.

The bait I used was worms and glittery green crappie power bait. Like the other times before most of the fish I caught by using small earthworms, with only two of the fish being caught off of the powerbait. The fish were surprisingly aggressive this time, probably because I started off in the part of pond where they seem most common. I caught quite a few greengill and bluegill in the first spot. I eventually moved towards a spot where that was sort of in the middle between my previous spot and the spot I usually fish. I caught some more greengill as well as green sunfish in and near this spot. I did cast near my usual spot and thats where I caught my first green sunfish of the day. When I cast out into the middle from this spot I caught the biggest greengill of the day. I moved to my usual spot and only caught one greengill.

I caught 10 greengill. I caught a lot of greengill today including the chunky 6 inch one I mentioned earlier.
I caught 3 bluegill. One of the bluegill had a bunch of parasites on it and another had a damaged caudal fin.
I caught 2 green sunfish. One thing to note is the second green sunfish I caught was caught from out near the middle of pond instead of the structure I usually catch them near.

Note: Unlike before I actually took pictures of each individual fish mostly because I decided to take measurements this time around.

Ingresado el 23 de enero de 2021 por jayce-the-creature-creator jayce-the-creature-creator | 15 observaciones | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
81320 icon thumb

City Nature Challenge 2021

What is the City Nature Challenge?

Invented by citizen science staff at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (Lila Higgins) and California Academy of Sciences (Alison Young). The City Nature Challenge is an international effort for people to find and document plants and wildlife in cities across the globe. It’s a bioblitz-style competition where cities are in a contest against each other to see who can make the most observations of nature, who can find the most species, and who can engage the most people.
Capture
The challenge will be held form 30th April to 3rd May and i hope you will all join in making as many observations as you can, focusing on an urban setting.
Please share your content and contact us with any ideas on events or activities and partnerships.
contact us;
email adelaidecnc@gmail.com

@streglystendec @benjaminlancer @knicolson @melbo @b_martin_ @anthonypaul @dgobbett @littlellama @kymurf @econiko @becstummer @furry12 @paradisaea @raenunan @frank_prinz @luana27 @insiderelic @vinialota @anneadelaide @katieirvine @leoniec @skylahgreen @fox-beren @drq
@salome10 @presidentfobhm @peri3 @rosesee @brittany_norris @garthwimbush @robbrooks @bewi1dered @pamwhetnall @philip-roetman @pam275 @hugo_walton @drmobs @chrisseager @nicole1219 @moira_new38 @rfoster @anscam @clhughes @mendacott @catarecute @elfir @adrianuren @ladymichele @darcywhittaker @bec9 @beachcomber15 @dumakey @lizdownunder @plo_osborne @owen65 @jane511 @jackscanlan @rhys_morgan @mtnlioness @fobhm @stekmer @bigpete @linda_millison @michelle46 @ian_ke113 @tom_w_ @angelinbotanico @matt1127 @adamtoomes @janetharris51 @danusia1 @gray13 @warrenhilton @mariannebroug @ned19 @eamw @swalker871 @diann6 @acrab @rosschristian @stephenrogers @slang1888 @wirranarnu @kgatesy @phrewt @ianmckeown @corovilla @lillian78 @jose880 @donna502 @kenhurley @kerryjones @cathmcm2020 @kgwhill @hmer @sarinozi @jpacker @wamoz @davemmdave @graeme6 @nikonoid @juicymac @janemariehyde @juliemciver @didavidson @sprouleco @fossil1513 @jessbamford @dhayward @hollyprice92 @jimfrog @sophiegreen @econess @thebirdersguide @stuartmitten @loupeth @jagt001 @bonniefelice @sullton @jeyho @shroomgoon @lynn357 @benmoulton @huddog101 @diannekoldits @meredithparker17 @justinratcliff @pickardgross @keefyrides @mandyshepherd @mrfarmerroy @daisyrui @cinta_jac @brucegotch @gkmk @ziawang @max_tibby @urbanpiece @irene_schmidt @mas422 @lukewaggs @alexthomsen @cgpjolly @lauracolagiovanni @sarahphone @organisergirl @celinachen @citscisamdb @bushpals @glaz @paulcoddington @spottydoghill @fomdfriendsofmindadunes @headdy @asimakis_patitsas @alishachaplin @chuditch @albastru @singhiella

Ingresado el 23 de enero de 2021 por stephen169 stephen169 | 5 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Back in the Woods

I went back to the trails today after a long time away. I went to Historic Blakeley State Park just north of Spanish Fort. I collected a number of observations that I've posted.

The park is not well known but it is the site of one of the last battles of the Civil War. Biologically there is a diverse spread of hardwoods, plants, wetlands, and the Tensaw Delta.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por jb_evans jb_evans | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Carpenter Bee

The iridescent wings of this flattened bee are what caught my eye. It was in the parking lot of a roadside fruit stand. A search for a live specimen among the local flowers was fruitless and only turned up honey bees.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por joseph-ca joseph-ca | 1 observación | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Berry Springs Preserve Herps of Texas report, 21Jan2021

Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, there was no group outing to Berry Springs Park and Preserve again this month. However, two people wearing face masks checked on the amphibians while staying at least six feet apart from each other at all times.
Two amphibian species were observed, Blanchard's Cricket Frog (CI = 0) and American Bullfrog (CI = 0).
There had been 0.25 inches of rain at the USGS gauge at Berry Creek at Airport Road (https://waterdata.usgs.gov/tx/nwis/uv/?site_no=08105095&PARAmeter_cd=00045) over the previous two days before monitoring. There was a larger puddle at the middle slough springhead than last month, the slough by the playground had water in it, and the water level in the main ponds was average. We heard a Barred Owl calling several times after dark from the other side of Berry Creek.
The monitoring period was 18:00 - 19:15.
Participants were Kathy and Amy.
Environmental conditions at the middle slough springhead at sunset:
Air temperature = 60.6 deg F
Water temperature = 66 deg F
Sky = mostly cloudy
Water level = below average at springhead, average at main ponds
Relative humidity = 65 %

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por k_mccormack k_mccormack | 2 observaciones | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
92196 icon thumb

Jan 29 call for new CNC organizers

Note: Please share this invitation with anyone you know who may be interested to find out more about the City Nature Challenge.

The City Nature Challenge is a friendly, annual, global event to record biodiversity. From April 30-May 3, 2021, participants will document wild plants, animals, and fungi using the iNaturalist mobile app and website. The Washington DC area is participating! Following the observation period, we'll all pitch in, with the help of experts, to identify what we’ve seen in our region-- and compete globally for most species observed. Global results will be announced on May 10. It's like a virtual bioblitz where you can participate from anywhere in the region.

Do you know an organization in the broader DC metro area that cares about biodiversity? Please join an introductory call on Friday, January 29, 11 am - 12 pm to learn more about the City Nature Challenge and/or join our Google Group to stay in the loop.

The Washington Metropolitan Area has participated annually since 2017. Dozens of environmental organizations, parks, libraries, nature centers, and other local groups help spread the word. There are many ways to be involved and collaborate with other organizations.

Examples of organizer participation include:

  • Encouraging your audience via email or social media to get outside and make observations during April 30-May 3
  • Incorporating the City Nature Challenge into existing programming or events
  • Posting signage at notice boards or trailheads
  • Helping organize a virtual event
  • Recruiting and supporting expert naturalists to make and identify observations

We encourage everyone to think about ways to broaden participation for underrepresented groups. We have outreach materials in Spanish and encourage bilingual events.

We hope you’ll join this exciting event in 2021, and we look forward to connecting with new groups across the region!

Carrie Seltzer
Stella Tarnay
Deborah Barber
DC area CNC co-organizers

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por carrieseltzer carrieseltzer | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
95319 icon thumb

Duke Energy Right Of Ways

Many greenspace parcels like the one at the Heritage Center suffer behind duke energy right of ways. Any native tree that out-competes honeysuckle along Eight Mile is lopped off by Duke energy. There are many greenspace parcels that look unseemly from the road because of this. Perhaps the “no planting” rule could have an addendum that allows planting of understory trees by the tree committee only along Duke Energy right of ways that front greenspace parcels.

The increased maintenance on the part of the township could be mitigated in two ways:

  • Clearly mark where the greenspace parcel begins and ends along the Duke Energy right of way. This would allow township mower crews who come through with the mower deck attached to the long arm to take extra care between any two signs.
  • Plant similar native under-story trees in each right of way such that the public begins to associate those understory trees with greenspace areas. If the palette included say, dogwood, redbud, hornbeam, sassafras, and viburnum, the public would begin to recognize that these plantings indicate that the land beyond them is greenspace. This would make it easier for volunteer crews to understand which trees to pull honeysuckle and ivy away from if the guy with the expensive mower needs to take a wider circle around the trees between the signs.

At the very least, an inventory of greenspace parcels that would benefit most from this approach could be created. It would be manageable to do this at the Heritage Center as a proof of concept. The length of greenspace in the Duke right of way at the heritage center is definitely short enough to be manageable by volunteers and mower crews for which thoughtful signage results in thoughtful mowing. This is also a highly visible greenspace parcel. If the public sees that this approach is worthwhile, there may be increased interest in volunteering on the part of those willing to take ownership of other right of way's fronting greenspace areas.

Another small point that's worth making is just how difficult it is to clean up garbage from within a thicket of honeysuckle. I volunteered for a couple years to clean up the trash along Old Five Mile. You could plainly see a cascade of bottles and debris all down the road embankment but there was no way to penetrate the honeysuckle tangle to retrieve it. Changing our approach to right of ways would help the volunteers who are trying to help the community. If it were easier to get to the trash, more people might volunteer to pick it up.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por stockslager stockslager | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Nature Journal #1 Semester 2 Friday, January 21, 2021

Today is Friday, January 22, 2021, and I have been watching a live bear cam, and here are my findings.

I was watching for about 20 minutes and thought that was good to stop there. I would say the time at this location was 3:30 in the afternoon. I was watching a bear cam located in Brooks Falls, Katmai National Park, Alaska. The bears were a typical brownish hue. The bears were stomping around in the waterfall and sitting down in the lush waterfall enjoying the sunny day. The camera moved about 180 degrees and stopped towards the edge of the waterfall. The bears were then seen trying to catch fish going upstream. Some bears were successful in catching their food and others took many tries. But they were overall successful. They then went to a wooded area and relaxed for the duration of 9 minutes. I heard the waterfall rush and flow along. I heard the bears letting out heavy breaths too. I noticed the fish were probably Sablefish. It honestly reminded me of how I went fishing with a friend and we caught one.

Sources: youtube.com/watch?v=IcWTPFnqOLo

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por aaronbruh aaronbruh | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
66107 icon thumb

Comment on relative abundance

I just made a post that I want to use to emphasize the point that in making observations for this project I don't pay attention to relative abundance. I'm most often by far looking for new taxa. Take a look here where I show 6 larvae of the lichen carrying green lacewing Leucochrysa pavida trapped in one field of view: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/68458137 Up to this point I had only posted one other individual. It breaks my bug-loving heart to witness the mortality that these tree bands inflict on this species. It seems to be part of the natural history of L. pavida larvae to climb the trunks of (oak) trees under cover with their lichen camouflage where they get trapped and die by the hundreds each tree banding season. If I were documenting relative abundance I'd be photographing this species very very often along with countless flies and spiders that I ignore.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por kenkneidel kenkneidel | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
94575 icon thumb

Questions

On 1/20 I visited the edge of a nearby swamp. While observing I noticed a log that had been torn to splinters. Who did this? a bear, skunk, or other mammal?
After finding a hollowed out acorn shell in a witches broom and imagining the chipmunk that may have called it home for a bit, I wondered how are witch's brooms formed. So I went to Wikipedia today: "This can be caused by cytokinin, a phytohormone which interferes with growth regulation. The phenomenon can also be caused by other organisms, including fungi, oomycetes, insects, mites, nematodes, phytoplasmas, and viruses". Wow, so much diversity that can change a tree or bush resulting in a singular mutation! And I had naively assumed that all witch's brooms were caused by only one certain insect, fungi, or hormone, etc.
Also, there were numerous shrubs of the same species in the swamp. What characteristics or adaptations make this particular shrub survive so well in the swamp?
Photos of shrub and witch's broom have been submitted.
Ginger

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por gingerventi gingerventi | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Seven areas from the Maritimes are registered to participate in the 2021 global City Nature Challenge

Does anyone remember the Maritimes 2020 City Nature Challenge? Lets put 2020 behind us and plan for a great 2021.

The global CNC will take place once again in two parts. The first 4 days (April 30th - May 3rd) will be dedicated to recording observations. These observations may be uploaded immediately or a few hours or days later. The cutoff for uploading is May 9th. Observations may be identified at any time but the focus of the second part of the CNC is on getting as many observations as possible identified.

The CNC stats include the number of participants, the number of observations, and the number of species. It is fun watching the changes in the leaderboard over the CNC event - it is easy to tell when groups of iNatters in different parts of the world are sleeping.

There are 7 areas from the Maritimes registered to participate in the 2021 event. These include 3 areas in Nova Scotia (HRM, CBRM, and the Valley), 3 areas in New Brunswick (Westmorland County, Charlotte County, and Fredericton), and one entry from 'urban' PEI (combined Charlottetown and Summerside).

In order for our entries to be respectable we need everyone to participate. This is a great opportunity to introduce iNat to family, friends, neighbours, colleagues, and anyone else who might listen! If you are unable to travel and help collect observations from any of the registered areas you can still participate by helping identify observations. You can also mentor participants and suggest species that they should look for or areas to explore.

Mark your calendars today but don't wait until April to learn how to use iNat - get out exploring as soon as possible and make a list of places that you can re-visit once the challenge starts.

The objectives of the local organizers are the same as in past years. We simply wish to encourage people to get outdoors, to explore, to observe nature, to share observations, and to have fun.

To keep informed about the CNC in our area please join this iNat project!

And of course follow our Facebook page.

If you have any questions just send us an email at cnc2019hrm@gmail.com

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por mkkennedy mkkennedy | 3 comentarios | Deja un comentario
47434 icon thumb

Defining Death in the iNaturalist Community

Hi Dead Fishes Project Community,

This project has a simple goal: to collect observations of dead fishes from around the globe. A few recent comments have prompted me to consider the nuances of what we consider "dead" fishes in this community. I may have been on my own in my previous considerations, so here I pose to you: what constitutes a dead fish- wash-up, bones, decaying organisms, fishes being preyed on, market fishes, fishes that are dying (i.e. have been poisoned by red tide) but not died yet, or any other markers or conditions? Please leave your suggestions for what constitutes dead fish in the comments. I will collate the suggestions we come up with into a comprehensive list of guidelines for observations to be included in this project.

My main concern is surrounding the boundary of death in observations- must the death be absolute and current (i.e. decayed remains), or do those that are in the act of dying "count" as dead fishes? Is a dead animal dead from the moment it biologically dies, unobserved- or does the moment of its consumption which is observed count? I have also come across a number of observations recently of fish that are ill from red tide that will likely die soon but have not yet- do these observations belong in this project? How we choose to define "dead fishes" as a project will determine how we move forward with such types of observations.

Thanks for your help and support,
Keira (Project Manager)

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por kmccartney3521 kmccartney3521 | 2 comentarios | Deja un comentario
5513 icon thumb

Feb. 18th iMapInvasives webinar Q&A invitation

Greetings Oregon iMapInvasives Community,

On Thursday, February 18th, the iMapInvasives Network along with staff from NatureServe will be hosting a special virtual Q&A panel discussion at 10:00 am PST, and you’re invited to attend!

During this special webinar event, administrators from each of the current iMapInvasives jurisdictions (AZ, ME, NY, OR, PA, and SK) as well as iMapInvasives developers from NatureServe will serve as panelists and answer questions about iMapInvasives in an effort to provide a better understanding of the history of iMapInvasives, its many capabilities, and how others in your state or province are utilizing the iMapInvasives platform to abate the threat of invasive species.

An opportunity to submit one or more questions for discussion as part of this webinar is open to anyone who pre-registers. (Submit a question here.) All questions must be submitted by February 8th (or sooner) for consideration as part of the webinar’s panel discussion. Example questions can include (but are not limited to):

· How did the iMapInvasives program come to be, and for what reason?

· What are some of the differences as well as similarities of iMapInvasives as compared to other online invasive species tracking databases?

· My state/province is not currently listed as an active jurisdiction in the iMapInvasives Network. Does that mean I can’t contribute data to the platform?

Depending on the total amount of questions received, there is a chance your question may not be discussed during the webinar. However, the panelists will do their best to answer as many questions as possible. There will also be a brief time at the end of the webinar (~15 minutes) for participants to ask other questions to the panelists that were not pre-submitted.

Registration for this event is available here and will be open till February 17th, 2021.

We are excited to hear your questions and hope you can join us for this new and exciting event!

-Lindsey Wise, Oregon iMapInvasives Administrator


iMapInvasives Live Q&A Panel: Have Your Questions Answered About iMapInvasives”

· Date: Thursday Feb 18th, 2021 at 10:00 am PST

· Skill Level with iMapInvasives: Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced

· Webinar Length: One hour, 15 minutes

· Who Should Attend: Anyone with an iMapInvasives registered user account, or individuals with an interest in learning more about the iMapInvasives program

Registration link: https://natureserve.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_9nAUm4aORuaqpuX8BLSGRA

Submit a question to be discussed during the webinar: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScw4u1PmTcdroLf10dirZdZ6DB0s2kgbdTpO8f6Jp1hGKES0Q/viewform

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por wisel wisel | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

The Inner Richmond neighborhood watch

Sheltering-in-place has made us stay home and hang out on the rooftop more. Over time, I have gotten quite familiar with our neighborhood corvids, pigeons, and gulls - their sizes, habits, and calls. Although I still sometimes mix up crows and ravens, following their sudden defense caws have led to many bird actions in the neighborhood. Recently, I noticed that the pigeons and gulls are starting to get involved in chasing threats away too.

Still, there's a Red-shouldered Hawk (or maybe several) that would challenge the neighborhood gang from time to time. Sometimes, I can't see it, but hearing its call makes me feel that it is somewhere near and that would drive me to locate it.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por linzyl linzyl | 11 observaciones | 1 comentario | Deja un comentario
75799 icon thumb

Jak to celé dopadlo?

📣 Spočítali jsme všechny záznamy, které jste nám poslali přes Facebook, iNaturalist i mail. Došli jsme k naprosto neuvěřitelnému číslu, ze kterého se nám tají dech.
Vašich 5694 pozorování motýlů pokrylo celou Prahu! Našli jste 69 druhů a do akce se vás zapojilo 274 !!!
Velmi si ceníme každého údaje, který jste nám poslali. Pro vznikající atlas pražských motýlů jsou vaše pozorování obrovskou pomocí, kterou jsme vůbec nečekali. DĚKUJEME VÁM !
Pokud vás hledání pražských motýlů bavilo, pokračujte dál v pozorování přírody. Když k ukládání vašich nálezů využijte iNaturalist, pomůžete možná dalším podobně zaměřeným projektům, jako je ten náš.
Na jaře pro vás budeme mít pár nápadů, jak se zapojit do dalšího hledání pražských motýlů. A už zítra vyhlásíme vítěze naší soutěže. Tak nám zachovejte přízeň 😉.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por ladajakubikova ladajakubikova | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Announcing the 2021 City Nature Challenge! Seven areas from the Maritimes are registered to participate!

Does anyone remember the Maritimes 2020 City Nature Challenge? Lets put 2020 behind us and plan for a great 2021.

The global CNC will take place once again in two parts. The first 4 days (April 30th - May 3rd) will be dedicated to recording observations. These observations may be uploaded immediately or a few hours or days later. The cutoff for uploading is May 9th. Observations may be identified at any time but the focus of the second part of the CNC is on getting as many observations as possible identified.

The CNC stats include the number of participants, the number of observations, and the number of species. It is fun watching the changes in the leaderboard over the CNC event - it is easy to tell when groups of iNatters in different parts of the world are sleeping.

There are 7 areas from the Maritimes registered to participate in the 2021 event. These include 3 areas in Nova Scotia (HRM, CBRM, and the Valley), 3 areas in New Brunswick (Westmorland County, Charlotte County, and Fredericton), and one entry from 'urban' PEI (combined Charlottetown and Summerside).

In order for our entries to be respectable we need everyone to participate. This is a great opportunity to introduce iNat to family, friends, neighbours, colleagues, and anyone else who might listen! If you are unable to travel and help collect observations from any of the registered areas you can still participate by helping identify observations. You can also mentor participants and suggest species that they should look for or areas to explore.

Mark your calendars today but don't wait until April to learn how to use iNat - get out exploring as soon as possible and make a list of places that you can re-visit once the challenge starts.

The objectives of the local organizers are the same as in past years. We simply wish to encourage people to get outdoors, to explore, to observe nature, to share observations, and to have fun.

To keep informed about the CNC in our area please join this iNat project!

And of course follow our Facebook page.

If you have any questions just send us an email at cnc2019hrm@gmail.com

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por mkkennedy mkkennedy | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

70. Hoe zit het nu met Voorvader Ontkenningen

https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements

Wat is een Gemeenschap taxon ?

Every observation with at least one identification has what we call an Observation Taxon. This is the label shown at the top of the observation page and is the taxon that the observations is "filed under" on the tree of life.

The Community Taxon (also sometimes called the Community Identification) is a way to derive a single identification from multiple identifications provided by the community. If an observation has more than one identification, it will also have a Community Taxon. The Observation Taxon will match the Community Taxon unless: (a) the observer has opted out of the Community Taxon, (b) there is an identification of a finer taxon that hasn’t been disagreed with (more on disagreements shortly).

Identifications hang on nodes on the tree of life. An identification adds an agreement with that node and also all of that nodes ancestors back to the root of the taxonomy.



If two identifications are on different branches of the tree of life, they each count as an agreement for the branch they are on and a disagreement for every node on the other branch back to the common ancestor of the two branches.



Each node is scored with the cumulative number of Agreements (i.e. the identifications on it or its descendants), the total number of Disagreements (from identifications on other branches), and something called "Ancestor Disagreements" which we’ll describe shortly.

The Community Taxon is the finest ranked taxon with at least two agreements where the ratio of the number of agreements to the sum of agreements, disagreements, and ancestor disagreements is greater than ⅔.

In contrast, the Observation Taxon will always match the Community Taxon unless:

a) there is just a single identification, then the Observation Taxon will be defined by that identification

b) the observer opts out of the Community Taxon, then the Observation Taxon will be defined by the observers identification

c) there are no disagreements and there is an identifications of descendants of the Community Taxon, then the Observation Taxon will be defined by the finest such identification (because the community likes that a single non-controversial identification being able to ‘move the ball forward’)*

*if that finest identification is of infra-species rank (eg subspecies), the Observation Taxon won't roll forward to that rank from the Community Taxon if that identification was added later (because the community doesn't like what would be Research Grade observations at species rank being rolled forward to Needs ID observations at infra-species rank). However, if the Observation Taxon was initially set at infra-species rank from a single identification, a non-disagreeing identification of an ancestor won't roll the Observation Taxon back to the Community Taxon.

What are Ancestor Disagreements?

So what are Ancestor Disagreements? If one person adds an identification of one node and another person thinks it’s not that but can’t provide an alternative on another branch, they might add an identification of an ancestor of that node. For example, I might add an identification of Seven-spotted Lady Beetle, but you might add an identification of the family lady beetles, which contains that and many other species.



When the Community Taxon was first implemented, any identification made after previous finer identifications in time was implied to be a disagreement with these finer taxa. These ‘implicit ancestor disagreements’ are now labeled as such.



They only disagree with taxa associated with previous finer identifications. Also some bugs were fixed in how the Community ID charts on the observation page handle "implicit ancestor disagreements".

What are Explicit Disagreements?

Because of confusion about whether people were disagreeing or not, we later made ancestor disagreements "explicit". When an identification is made that is an ancestor of the Community Taxon (or the Observation Taxon if there’s only one identification), the identifier is now presented with a choice to indicate whether they are disagreeing with the Community Taxon or not.

If they are not disagreeing, their identification does not count as an ancestor disagreement for the taxon that was the Community Taxon.



And the identification is not labeled as a disagreement:



However, If they are disagreeing, their identification counts as an "explicit ancestor disagreement" with the Community Taxon.



And the identification is labeled accordingly:

Two ways to disagree...

When we implemented this, we thought that ancestor disagreeing should disagree with the entire branch below the disagreeing identification i.e. “I disagree that this is Seven-spotted Lady Beetle and all taxa on the branch between Seven-spotted Lady Beetle and the taxon I have proposed”. Let’s call this the “Branch Disagreement” way to disagree.

We’ve since come to realize that our communication about this was inconsistent and confusing, based on numerous discussions with community members in person and in the Forum. Furthermore, these discussions suggest the community interprets disagreeing as just with the Community Taxon i.e. “I disagree that this is Seven-spotted Lady Beetle but not the whole branch below the taxon I have proposed”. Let’s call this the “Leading Disagreement” way to disagree. We’ve also since realized from the Forum that Leading Disagreement is a more common and less controversial way to disagree than Branch Disagreement.

At the end of this post, we’ll discuss planned changes to improve things moving forward. But for now, let’s try to clarify our communication describing how things are currently behaving to all get on the same page.

Imagine the following sequence of identifications:

Branch Disagreement tallies disagreements as follows:

Which differs from how one would tally disagreements for the Leading Disagreement case:

Notice that this can impact how the Community Taxon is calculated. In this example, Branch Disagreement computes the Community Taxon as Lady Beetles Family:

While Leading Disagreement would compute it as Asian Lady Beetle:

The site is currently assuming Branch Disagreement as it calculates the Community Taxon. We tried to capture the language for the Potential Disagreement question to distinguish "not disagreeing" with "branch disagreeing" as:



To more precisely capture how the Community Taxon was being calculated this could have been worded something like:

Likewise, Ancestor disagreement identifications could have been more precisely labeled something like the following to reflect how the Community Taxon is being calculated.

Planned changes to distinguishing the two ways to disagree

While we hope the above description will help clear up much of the confusion with how iNaturalist is handling explicit ancestor disagreements, we’ve also learned that these two ways of disagreeing (branch and leading) are distinct and both useful. While "leading disagreement" is clearly the most commonly-used way to disagree, we still think that "branch disagreement" is useful, particularly in enabling the community to stop observations from becoming too finely identified beyond where the community can be certain.

We’re working on changes that would enable identifiers to indicate which way (leading or branch) they are disagreeing. The Potential Disagreement prompt will have three questions:



Here the first orange button would mean a "leading disagreement" and the second would mean a "branch disagreement".

Likewise, "leading disagreement" identifications will be decorated as:



and "branch disagreement" identifications will be decorated as:

Apologies for the length of this post, but we hope it clarifies some of the confusion about how the "ancestor disagreement" functionality is currently working and planned improvements to address concerns expressed in the forum.

https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/25514-clarifying-ancestor-disagreements

Prof. Mulder van TU Delft heeft een lezing gegeven over de Battolyser een innovatie op basis van een ruim 150 jaar oud principe van een ijzer-accu. Deze technologie heeft het in zich om aan zowel de korte als lange termijn energie-opslag en afgifte behoefte te voorzien.

https://www.tudelft.nl/en/technology-transfer/development-innovation/research-exhibition-projects/battolyser/

https://www.battolyserbv.com/2019/05/02/first-battolyser-for-electricity-storage-and-hydrogen-production-thanks-to-waddenfonds-in-groningen/

22 januarii
Energie transitie! Jazeker, maar hoe?
Prof.dr.ir. N.G. Deen
Power & Flow, Werktuigbouwkunde,
Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
https://www.ngm1780.nl/events/energie-transitie-jazeker-maar-hoe/

26 februari
“Klaar voor de toekomst”, de ontwikkeling van het hoogspanningsnet in Zeeland
Gert Aanhaanen, Peter Kwakman, Bart van Hulst
Afdeling netstrategie
TenneT TSO B.V.
https://www.ngm1780.nl/events/electriciteitsdistributie/

9 april
Het energiesysteem van de toekomst in Zeeland
dr. Ir. A. Jongepier
energietransitie
Enduris, Goes
https://www.ngm1780.nl/events/electriciteit-in-zeeland/

https://www.kng-groningen.nl/programma-lezingen/

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por ahospers ahospers | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

A Brief History of Texas Lepidoptera Observations on iNaturalist

As part of a research project on the distibutional biases of citizen science data such as iNaturalist, I have been examining the uploads of Lepidoptera observations (butterflies and moths) in my home state of Texas. I chose Lepidoptera because of my own particular taxonomic interests and because it offers a finite set of data to analyze. Here I present some details of the history of iNat uploads as background. All the data recited below are complete as of December 31, 2020, with most of the statistics accessed through the Explore page in the first few weeks of January 2021.

Figure 1a (below) shows a heat map of all the available Lepidoptera observations in Texas at the end of 2020. This can be compared to the distribution of all forms of life as shown in Figure 1b. These are intriguing maps but I'll reserve more discussion of them until I complete my research project. As of 31 December 2020, a total of 541,588 observations of Lepidoptera in Texas had been uploaded to iNaturalist by 26,022 observers (Fig. 1a). By iNaturalist's calculation, these document a total of 3,429 species or about 62% of the total Texas Lep fauna, which stands at about 5,502 species (Knudson & Bordelon 2018, fide @krancmm).

Fig 1a-b

History of uploads, observations, and observer base. iNaturalist was established with the first uploads by the U.C. Berkeley-based developers of the platform in March 2008 (@kueda et al.). The first Texas observation on the platform was, appropriately, an image of Texas Bluebonnets uploaded on 25 March 2008 by @lisa_and_robb:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/47
The next three years saw only limited and apparently experimental uploads of a few Texas observations. The first Texas Lepidoptera upload of a recent living example was a Gulf Fritillary larva observed 23 August 2011 and uploaded 31 August 2011 by Kari Gaukler (@atxnaturalist):
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/29772
In that first year of uploads (2011), just three observers uploaded a total of five observations documenting four species. Since those early uploads, several hundred observers have uploaded thousands of historical observations which predate the rollout of iNaturalist; the earliest "observations" of Lepidoptera in Texas now available on iNaturalist are actually digital images of museum specimens collected as far back as 1938:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/38371826
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/38371803
Because of such uploads of historical records, a compilation of Texas Lepidoptera observations on the platform now shows some 7,587 observations through calendar year 2011. More widespread use of the platform started in 2012. Over the next five year period (2012-16), 2,664 contributors uploaded over 49,000 additional observations. The next watershed moment in the use of the platform came in 2017 when Texans began participating in the City Nature Challenge (organized by California Academy of Science and the Natural History Museum of LA County). From 2017 through 2020, 24,422 contributors uploaded nearly a half million additional observations. Table 1 (below) charts the growth of Lepidoptera uploads for the ten year time frame from the first uploads through 2020.

Growth of TX Lep Uploads

The set of figures below present heat maps of Texas Lepidoptera observations (including "historic" observations uploaded more recently) for periods representing (a) the entire 20th Century, (b) 2000 through 2009, (c) 2010 through 2019, and (d) just the observations for calendar year 2020. Available "historic" observations (i.e. through 2007) are still modest in number, particularly for the period of the 20th Century (Fig. 2a, b), predating the era of widespread digital photography. Numbers of available observations vastly increased after 2010 (Fig. 2c), mostly representing uploads of contemporary observations. For a variety of socioeconomic reasons in 2020, not the least of which was the Covid-19 pandemic, an increase of 44.5% in the total number of observers lead to a 50.6% increase in the total number of observations compared to the total number through the end of 2019 (Fig. 2d).

Fig 2a-d

My ongoing research will examine the geographic aspects of such data including comparisons to the distribution of the Texas population (an obvious comparison) and the distribution and efforts of iNaturalists who have contributed the observations.

I'm grateful to @sambiology, @mako252, @krancmm, @tiwane, and @loarie for help with some of this data and their early input on the direction of this project.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por gcwarbler gcwarbler | 6 comentarios | Deja un comentario
32150 icon thumb

20000 наблюдений!

Дорогие друзья!

Около 3 месяцев у нас ушло на достижение очередной круглой цифры 20000 наблюдений. Число видов достигло 1170, экспертов 545, наблюдателей 263. 20000-е наблюдение загрузила Irina Bashkevich!

Всех поздравляем с отличным результатом! Движемся дальше!

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por vladimirov vladimirov | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
91529 icon thumb

Скоро День орнитолога

Дорогие друзья! Спасибо Вам за активное участие в проекте Российская зима 2020-2021! Наблюдения за зимующими в Тульской области птицами ведутся на высоком уровне. Больше 1000 документированных данных о 55 видах! Многие из Вас почти не знают друг друга, но вместе - уже настоящая команда. У нас есть отличный повод встретиться и познакомиться друг с другом поближе. 19 февраля в России отмечают как День орнитолога. Благодаря гостеприимству Тульского экзотариума мы могли бы собраться, пообщаться и скромно отметить это событие в стенах нового здания зоопарка в Центральном парке культуры и отдыха им. П.П. Белоусова 12 или 19 февраля. Очень вероятно, что в гости к нам приедет замечательный зоолог, орнитолог Евгений Коблик. Чтобы лучше подготовиться из-за некоторых формальностей, сообщите нам, пожалуйста, хотели бы Вы и могли бы прийти на это мероприятие 12 или 19 числа во второй половине дня. Написать можно в комментариях под этим сообщением или в личном сообщении мне. С уважением, Смирнова Елена.
@apus_apus
@rom86
@marina-privalova
@igor_scherbakov
@adeev
@ludaalimova
@vadim_shulgin
@uroboros
@anyuta
@naturalist25051
@sergeilysenkov
@margosha
@jt_f
@anastasia182

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por elenasmirnova elenasmirnova | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
7243 icon thumb

Range extended to the Exclusive Economic Zone of Portugal

Due to some species being pelagic it's only natural that the project includes records outside the territorial boundaries of Portugal but within its Exclusive Economic Zone. This adds one more species to the Project checklist, Fiona pinnata.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por jpsilva jpsilva | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Определение пчёл подсемейства Nomiinae (Halictidae) России

Ключ к родам и видам России и сопредельных стран:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251086591_Bees_of_the_subfamily_Nomiinae_Hymenoptera_Halictidae_of_Russia_and_adjacent_countries_Keys_to_genera_and_species
Рукопись о семействе в России:
https://www.zin.ru/boards/00222301/materials/archive/AstafurovaYV.pdf
Сайт с фотографиями многих видов (с признаками, важными для определения):
Pseudapis http://www.atlashymenoptera.net/page.aspx?id=83
Nomiapis (в систематике iNat в составе Pseudapis) http://www.atlashymenoptera.net/page.aspx?id=72
Lipotriches http://www.atlashymenoptera.net/page.aspx?id=91
Acunomia (в систематике iNat subg. Nomia) http://www.atlashymenoptera.net/page.aspx?id=170
Hoplomia (в систематике iNat subg. Nomia) http://www.atlashymenoptera.net/page.aspx?id=133

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por melodi_96 melodi_96 | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Delta pyriforme-nest building

The summers are becoming too warm and the heat is unbearable. At the same time, a significant decrease in the availability of water makes more difficult. At this point, do we think about other organisms around us? It always remains as a question.
The theme of this year's Biodiversity day is "OUR SOLUTIONS ARE IN NATURE". This is explicitly true.Only the one who sense it could recognize it.During this lockdown days, I came to know that my homestead is rich in biodiversity since there was a lot of time during this period.
There was a sight, which surprised me a lot. A wasp like creature was flying around the wet clothes kept for drying. It flew away in a matter of seconds after sucking water from it.Though I don't know where it was going, it was coming at the spot several times.
The next day, there was no clothes left for drying. Surprisingly I saw it flying around the well!, the only source of water.It was sucking the water content from the rope which was used to take water.While reaching the rope, it's wings were still and after the intake, a sudden flight was noticed.
Finally I found it in my house. There was also a mud nest nearby.After seeing the mudnest, I understood that it is potterwasp.The wonderful architecture of the 'pot' like mud nest is always a beauty.
The potterwasp uses the water for building this nest.While reaching the water source, the suck the water inwards and release them on reaching a place where they could get good granular soil by the process of regurgitation. After mixing the water with the soil, they would make a mud ball and will carry it to the construction site. The potter wasp entered my house though a window which was kept open. The nest was also near to the window.
For now, the work of the first cell was completed.Interestingly, I could spot a green caterpillar inside. Afterwards, the potterwasp closed the opening of the cell.I waited for the construction of the next cell so that I could understand their nesting behavior from the beginning.After my great expectations
For now, the work of the first cell was completed.Interestingly, I could spot a green caterpillar inside. Afterwards, the potterwasp closed the opening of the cell.I waited for the construction of the next cell so that I could understand their nesting behavior from the beginning.After a period of time, the potterwasp came lighting my expectations and started the work for building nest. Small balls of mud were brought from the backyard. With a small mud ball, construction continues for two minutes. So it needs many balls to build a big nest.It is very interesting to see how the mason builts the house. The head is moved forward with the help of a pair of frontlegs. https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/85750477
There is an ivory like part at the bottom of the head, near mouth, the mandibles.
With it's help, the potterwasp digs the soil. The next two pair of legs helps them to stand firm.With the head yellow there are two large black shiny compound eyes. The movement of the heads will surely doubt us whether they are telling something to us.Their thorax is half yellow half reddish brown and the abdomen is reddish brown and yellow, with a black stripe in middle
Work on the second cell was completed.After that, I saw it folding it abdomen into the cell.Now I understood it was about to lay the eggs.Soon after laying eggs, she disappeared. After sometime, she came. But wasn't alone.A green moth caterpillar was also with her.She put the caterpillar inside and left the place. I wondered why the caterpillar was unable to escape through the hole in her absence?.She came again with another caterpillar and put it into the cell.A wonderful feast by the mother wasp for her beloved ones.
I took a glimpse towards their life.The main food of an adult potterwasp is flower nectar. Once they undergo mating, the female potterwasp collects the sperms from the male.Later it is all the female who are actually seen in the scenario. After mating, the females searches and finds a suitable place for building nest.
Now she starts to build the nest.Once she completes the work , its time to lay the eggs.She can decide the sex of eggs they lay.That is, if the egg is fertilised with the sperm which was collected during mating, it will be a female.If it is unfertilized, then the eggs will be males. After laying eggs,her duty shifts into finding food for the larvae that comes after hatching. Their major preys are lepidopteran caterpillars and spiders. After stinging the caterpillars, she takes them with her.After putting them inside the cell, she closed the opening of the cell.Then the cell is covered once again with mud.This is because other wasps could enter inside the cell and destroy the eggs and lay their own eggs.Now she has no role left with that cell. She starts to build the next one.Finally on completion of the nest, she leaves.I saw five cells built by her.
They belong to order Hymnoptera, Eumeninae subfamily of the vespidae family. The potterwasp which visited my house was Delta pyriforme.
They do not lead a social life. Generally wasps are very violent. But potterwasps are not violent as others. We could observe them without fear. But make sure that it is not being hurted.
We need to understand that it is not very easy for a potterwasp to buid it's nest.Finding a suitable place, building nest, laying eggs, search for prey, paralyzing them, putting them into the cell creates thousands of questions in our mind.
The honeybees understands a place through waggle dance.But how does a potterwasp finds the correct position of her nest, water source, soil source etc.
The answer is when they start to fly, there is a zig zag movement at the beginning. They considers some signs to keep the position in mind. We can always see this test flight before they start flying.
Many days passed. The eggs inside the nest hatched. The larvae ate the reserved food.The adult potterwasps came out of the cell with the help of secretions from mouth.When Delta pyriforme left, the next guest came to the same nest. It was a muddauber was in the genus Chalybyon.Many other creatures enters the used nests of potterwasps. Afterall, it is very exciting to observe them. The joy of finding them is indescribable.
Documentation video : https://youtu.be/atuYmG2Yi_k
Potter wasp feeding on flower nectar : https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57229371

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por unnikrishnan_mp unnikrishnan_mp | 2 observaciones | 2 comentarios | Deja un comentario
92653 icon thumb

Atlas Paddenstoelen Drenthe

Atlas Paddenstoelen Drenthe



Voorzijde van de folder van de Ecologische Atlas van Paddenstoelen in Drenthe met de omslagen van de drie delen. Deze atlas is in gedrukte vorm uitverkocht.


Bij de oprichting van de Paddenstoelen Werkgroep Drenthe in 1999 was de belangrijkste doelstelling een vlakdekkende inventarisatie van de mycoflora in Drenthe en het publiceren van de resultaten in boekvorm. Dit doel is in 2015 verwezenlijkt met de publicatie van de driedelige Ecologische Atlas van Paddenstoelen in Drenthe. Helaas was de hele oplage van het boek in 2018 uitverkocht. Het is alleen nog antiquarisch te koop. Een herdruk wordt niet verwacht. Daarom heeft het bestuur van de PWD in december 2019 besloten om de volledige inhoud van deze atlas op onze website te plaatsen, zodat deze voor alle belangstellenden toegankelijk is.


Op deze pagina staan alle hoofdstukken van deze atlas als afzonderlijke items. Ze kunnen hier worden geraadpleegd en ze kunnen als PDF file worden gedownload voor privé gebruik.
Op deze webversie zijn de auteursrechten van toepassing die ook gelden voor de Atlas in boekvorm: Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden verveelvoudigd en/of openbaar gemaakt door middel van druk, microfilm, fotokopie of op welke andere wijze ook, zonder voorafgaande schriftelijke toestemming van de eerste auteur.
Eerste auteur: Eef Arnolds; eefarnolds@gmail.com.
—————————————————————————————————————————————-


On this page the complete content can be found of the ‘Ecologische Atlas van Paddenstoelen in Drenthe‘, published by ‘Werkgroep Paddenstoelen Kartering Drenrthe’. The printed version (2015) is sold-out and will not be printed again. Each chapter can be consulted and may be downloaded as PDF file for private use.
On this webversion the same copyright applies as for the printed version: No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by print, microfilm or any other means without written permission from the first author.
First author: Eef Arnolds; eefarnolds@gmail.com.

DEEL 1 INLEIDING

DEEL 2 GRASLANDEN, HEIDEN, MOERASSEN EN CULTUURLAND

DEEL 3 LOOF- EN NAALDBOSSEN


Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por optilete optilete | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Bungendore - Spooks Hill - Summer- January 22

It's been a while since I walked up to Spooks Hill and it's interesting to see the grasses once green are tall and dry, their seed heads nodding in the breeze. The native raspberry Rubus parvifolius have sweet, red berries though they are desiccating on the brambles. The Scotch Thistle Onoporium acanthium seems to have been taken over by a new type of thistle that I've never seen before but looks to be Carthamus lanatus.

I spotted another plant I hadn't seen before. It looks like some kind of Eryngos but I can't be sure what kind. There was also a tree heaving with small yellow fruit. They tasted like plums so I'm assuming that the tree was a yellow fruiting Cherry-Plum Prunus cerasifera. I wasn't sure if several of the purple flowering plants along the path were Paterson's Curse Echium plantagineum because they don't look like the ID photos.

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por froggie79 froggie79 | 5 observaciones | 0 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Thumb

Thoughts on the challenges of spider-IDing on iNaturalist

Long effortpost TL;DR: I am proposing that the people who help identify spiders on iNat (though this probably also applies to many other groups of small arthropods) make more liberal use of the Data Quality Assessment flag "No, it's as good as it can get" when we believe it is unlikely an observation will ever get a more specific ID. This is intended to be a conversation starter among the handful of people who follow spiders and help with identification. Again, this is not entirely specific to spiders but that's my area of study/interest so that's how I wrote this out.


Recently I spent a couple of weeks trying to review "all" of the Texas spider observations in Needs-ID state and give reasonable IDs where I could (even just moving from Order -> Family for later review). For people who have spent a lot of time sorting through these buckets, you are probably familiar with some of the headaches. For a variety of reasons, many observations are simply not identifiable to any reasonable level (say, Family). After some discussion with a few of the other active identifiers, we decided it would be helpful to start tagging "unidentifiable" observations as such - using the Data Quality Assessment flag labeled "No, it's as good as it can get." This will turn the observation to either Research Grade or Casual depending on the community taxon level and (maybe?) the number of people who agree with that assessment. So it will be filtered out of most peoples' (default) identify criteria.

My main motivation for doing this is the steady increase in observations outpacing the ability of the identifiers to keep up with - There is a limited number of people actively reviewing spiders in North America (my main focus but also the bulk of observations) while iNat's popularity is increasing. So the number of observations is growing rapidly, and the number of identifiers seems to be either flat or dropping. I don't have exact numbers (although certainly the data is out there) but I recall from previous conversations that in 2019 the number of Needs-ID (Araneae / United States) was approaching 200k. By mid-2020 it was over 300k, and at the end of 2020 it was over 400k. Over 40% of the total observations in iNat's history were uploaded in 2020 alone. Going through these buckets is fairly time consuming if you are trying to be accurate and (even better) helpful. Over a 2-week period (probably averaging ~8 hours a day) I reviewed something like 20 thousand observations (rough guess) and made about 5-6 thousand IDs - mostly to family or genus. Probably less than 10% of those IDs were specific and probably only a couple percent actually resulted in an observation reaching RG. Of course I spent a lot of time consulting the literature and BugGuide, trying to include helpful comments where I could, etc. - so I was not going for maximum speed, but still was attempting to get through as much as I could in the time I had. Just trying to give a rough idea of the time it would take an average(ish) person to work through a pile of a given size. A month of work and 10,000+ IDs later and I feel like I'm about where I started.

Anyway, before long I decided to start marking observations I considered plainly "unidentifiable," to remove them from Needs-ID status. The rough criteria I initially used was that, due to the photo quality, I couldn't confidently place the observation in any particular family, and I doubt anyone else could either. I did not apply this to anything with clear photos that I simply wasn't familiar with, nor did I apply it to confusing taxa like the many similar-looking Agelenidae, Philodromidae, Thomisidae, Dictynidae, etc., where it was a good enough photo(s) but I couldn't identify it further. Because probably there is someone out there who studies the Dictynidae and is familiar enough with the patterns to make better IDs (even if that happens years later) and I don't want to get in the way of that. Basically, just photos where the quality/focus/angles could not justify even a family level ID. One example would be a photo of a "typical" orb web with no spider - so you could give an ID of Araneoidea (could be Araneidae, Tetragnathidae, maybe Uloboridae?) - but is it really necessary to keep that as "Needs ID" ? In most cases I left a copy/paste comment along the lines of "Unfortunately there is likely not enough detail to give a more specific ID" or "It is an orbweaver but I can't be sure which kind" so the observer at least knew that someone reviewed it.

Examples of where I have been applying this:

  • Photos that are plainly too blurry or distant to even suggest a family
  • Photos that are too dark and I could not improve sufficiently with basic photo editing software
  • Night photos lit with flash (mostly orbweavers in webs) where only the rough shape is visible
  • (Most) shed exoskeletons that do not seem to have identifying features other than 8 legs
  • Partial/abandoned webbing with no animal visible
  • Multiple possible species/genera and definitely not enough detail in the photos to be more specific

A lot of these are cell phone images from users who made an iNat account, posted an observation or ten, then never came back. Many of them seem to be what we call "duress users" - students who had to make X number of observations for a school assignment, then never came back. I definitely support that (we want more people to discover iNat) but it leaves a lot of "frass" as BugGuide calls it. Also I want to make clear that I fully appreciate the challenge of making good photos of tiny (often moving) animals and I am not trying to criticize anyone's photography. Spiders are difficult to photograph well, even with dedicated equipment (I still suck at it) and I don't want to discourage people from submitting these observations. But at this point iNat has a rapidly growing pile of spider photos that I feel will never even be reviewed, and I think removing "unidentifiable" things from Needs-ID as we go will eventually help the small group of people who are willing to spend their time on this. Of course I know it is not really possible to make a definite ID without the specimen in hand, and for that reason many observations may never reach RG, and that's fine. But there are 1000s of cases where we have the same photos being reviewed by the same 5 or 6 people over the course of several years, each individually making the determination that "It looks like some type of orbweaver maybe but that's the best I can do" and then it is left there for the next person. Which eats up a lot of time and seems unproductive/frustrating to IDers. So I am trying to find a way to make things better without being too aggressive/critical or accidentally "hiding" something that could be scientifically interesting.

Some other ideas I have had in parallel with this:

  • An Observation Field indicating the observation has (multiple) high quality photos - for easier review, maybe by more seasoned arachnologists.

    Could be particularly helpful for the smaller or more cryptic spiders like Erigoninae/Linyphiinae, Thomisidae, uncommon Therirdiids, etc. The idea being that we could present a more curated subset of high quality observations (e.g. all of wildcarrot's photos :) ) and request help from outside experts.
  • An Observation Field indicating the observation contains microscope photos - this is uncommon but I think would be useful.
  • "Holding bins" to help sort easily-confused or similar-looking taxa (like many Clubionidae/Cheiracanthidae/Anyphaenidae) for later review

    Joe Lapp did some initial work on this while he was more active on iNat (I think he stepped back partly because of the stuff I'm hoping to improve)
  • Observation fields or some other way to tag things like egg sacs/webs/spiderlings for further review, but get them out of Needs-ID
  • Some easy way to tag-team other IDers on observations that need more people to correct the community ID

    A common example is: Computer Vision said *Oecobius* (it's not), some other person agreed, so now we need 4 votes to fix it. This could take years to happen naturally, especially on older observations.

I ran some quick numbers while I was working and found that almost 40% of the total observations in iNat's history (Spiders / Texas) were made in 2020. Almost 40,000 observations, just spiders, just Texas. For USA it was well over 40%. Over 2/3 of all US spider observations (400,000+) are Needs-ID. I expect iNat will continue to grow at a steady pace, or at least I don't see any reason why its popularity would suddenly fall off. This is awesome, but is overwhelming for the limited number of volunteers we have to try and sort through everything. So that's pretty much it - I am looking at this as a way to make Spider-IDing-on-iNat better for us, without upsetting observers or obscuring any potentially-interesting observations. I welcome anyone's thoughts. I chose a journal entry because many people are not active on the iNat forum and this seemed the best way to involve everyone who might have input. It might not be the best forum for an active conversation but we'll see.

I did save a bunch of representative examples of things I would or wouldn't treat as "unidentifiable" for various reasons, but I didn't include it here because I didn't want this to seem like a call-out post - more a group problem solving thing. But if there is interest I can include some examples. I have had this basic conversation with several people individually so I thought a sort of group discussion might be productive.

Thanks for reading (sorry for the wall of words) and any opinions you would like to share about this, and thanks for the work you do to make iNat so awesome!

-Justin

Ingresado el 22 de enero de 2021 por jgw_atx jgw_atx | 4 comentarios | Deja un comentario
Más