Research Grade vs. Captive/Cultivated
I imagine I am not the only iNatter dissatisfied with the current distinction between "research grade" and "captive/cultivated" plant observations. I find it disheartening that ornamental trees, shrubs, etc. that were purposefully planted are almost totally ignored once they are marked "captive/cultivated." Such observations do not show up on default maps, which only show "research grade" observations or "casual" observations that are presumed wild (such as those without multiple concurring IDs). I only found out recently how to make maps on iNat. show "captive/cultivated" observations, and I believe this has been a hinderance to my casual research on certain species.
I agree that it is important to distinguish between wild plants and those that were purposefully planted, though I disagree with the current all-or-nothing method. I disagree with this because even if a tree/shrub is purposefully planted it is still able to reproduce or otherwise influence the landscape and ecology of the region. I think that a further distinction should be made between plants that have been established outside and houseplants. My reasoning is that ornamentals located outdoors are in a better position to reproduce and alter the local landscape and ecology than their indoor peers. Additionally, an ornamental's ability to survive outdoors is a great indicator of the species' hardiness and potential to become invasive, while houseplants are often far from their native habitats and conditions and would usually not survive without constant human attention. I suggest that the "Organism is Wild" section of the Data Quality Assessment (for plants and fungi, at least) be further divided into "Organism is Located Outdoors" and "Organism is Located Indoors," or some similar distinction. I would also suggest that "Organism is Located Outdoors" observations show up as a default on maps, though distinguished from "research grade" observations by a different marker color (perhaps yellow or a different shade of green).
I do not think that "captive/cultivated" specimens purposefully planted outdoors should qualify as "research grade," though I do believe they should enjoy greater status and attention than "captive/cultivated" specimens located inside. This could benefit research into invasiveness potential, species hardiness, native range, etc. while still acknowledging the effect of human intervention.
This is my first journal post, so I am not entirely sure if I am using the application correctly. Hopefully, this will fall on some receptive eyes and perhaps lead to some positive change.
