inaturalist site

[Jimbean]

https://www.inaturalist.org/home

I'm going through a bunch of plant species and it boggles my mind how many of these plants are misidentified

[Jimbean]

After doing a bunch of corrections, I decided to post a few of my palm observations.  I'll post them here because I figured you folks might be interested.  I have a ton of observations that I might post later if I ever get around to it.

 

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/170560123

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/170558603

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/170559505

[Silas_Sancona]

34 minutes ago, Jimbean said:

https://www.inaturalist.org/home

I'm going through a bunch of plant species and it boggles my mind how many of these plants are misidentified

This is one of the site's biggest faults..

Not sure why there isn't someone ( or groups of folks, lol ) that go through and correct clearly obvious ( and awful, lol ) miss- IDs among plants..  Have found plenty for sure in the 100s of hours spent looking at stuff there, lol.

Other thing i wish they'd integrated when the site first launched?  Color coding the ID's themselves... Say ..an observation ( of anything ) made within a year are Orange. After a year, Green, and after 5, the same observation pin point is purple ..  This could help in many ways.

[kinzyjr]

1 hour ago, Jimbean said:

After doing a bunch of corrections, I decided to post a few of my palm observations.  I'll post them here because I figured you folks might be interested.  I have a ton of observations that I might post later if I ever get around to it.

 

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/170560123

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/170558603

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/170559505

Nice work, Jim!

I added a few local observations for Ficus aurea on there, but stopped after the first two out of the three observed plants below were intentionally removed.

• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100394260
• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100394259
• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100394261

It was the intent to find the parent(s) and continue documenting their arrival and spread in the area, but it's sometimes better just to keep a secret.

[Silas_Sancona]

38 minutes ago, kinzyjr said:

Nice work, Jim!

I added a few local observations for Ficus aurea on there, but stopped after the first two out of the three observed plants below were intentionally removed.

• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100394260
• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100394259
• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100394261

It was the intent to find the parent(s) and continue documenting their arrival and spread in the area, but it's sometimes better just to keep a secret.

Interesting..   Any idea why they were removed?

[kinzyjr]

5 minutes ago, Silas_Sancona said:

Interesting..   Any idea why they were removed?

My best guess is aesthetics and to keep the two palmetto around longer.

[Silas_Sancona]

14 minutes ago, kinzyjr said:

My best guess is aesthetics and to keep the two palmetto around longer.

Ah,  you ment the observed Ficus, rather than the Inat observation..  Wonder if someone knew of it before hand, and you just happened upon specimens that were slated for removal.. Since both are native, not sure why someone would direct someone else to remove, based upon an observation posted.. 🤔 Really odd coincidence regardless..

[tropicbreeze]

You have to understand what iNaturalist is and what its limitations are. Also, what people use the site for. Being a citizen science program that anyone can join means there's always going to be a high possibility of error.

A lot of that comes about because many people don't know how to take decent diagnostic photos. I find it annoying when they're out of focus, give no clue as to plant growth habit, no clue as to habitat, etc.

However, the site would be the biggest collection of highly qualified people in the world, interspersed with the biggest collection of amateurs of varying levels of knowledge. So there's a lot of people around who can, and do, make corrections. I do a lot of IDs and some of those are corrections. But at the same time I can't guarantee that someone won't come along and correct me. That's the beauty of the whole thing.

I've had a lot of very iteresting discussions and have learned a lot (and am still learning). Just wish I'd had access to something like this as a kid.

[Silas_Sancona]

29 minutes ago, tropicbreeze said:

You have to understand what iNaturalist is and what its limitations are. Also, what people use the site for. Being a citizen science program that anyone can join means there's always going to be a high possibility of error.

A lot of that comes about because many people don't know how to take decent diagnostic photos. I find it annoying when they're out of focus, give no clue as to plant growth habit, no clue as to habitat, etc.

However, the site would be the biggest collection of highly qualified people in the world, interspersed with the biggest collection of amateurs of varying levels of knowledge. So there's a lot of people around who can, and do, make corrections. I do a lot of IDs and some of those are corrections. But at the same time I can't guarantee that someone won't come along and correct me. That's the beauty of the whole thing.

I've had a lot of very iteresting discussions and have learned a lot (and am still learning). Just wish I'd had access to something like this as a kid.

..Perfectly laid out..  Agree with the citing habitat / growth habit, etc..  clear and crisp pictures being the only ones accepted  thoughts.. The worst are the " single shot of a trunk / branch /  leaf / set of leaves ..and nothing else observations.. Drive me up a wall.. haha.

Agree, 100%,  ...Imagine what our level of knowledge would be of everything if this were fact..  Better late,  than never of course though.

[Xerarch]

I enjoy inaturalist a lot, I look at it all the time hoping beyond hope that some amazing species I've been looking for will pop up right where I'm hoping for it to appear .  Also I agree that you have to know what the site is good for and what it doesn't do.  The incorrect ID's though, yes they can be expected but why? I mean, if I'm not sure about what something is, I just don't say anything.  Why do people just willy-nilly throw stuff out there that is terribly and obviously false? It does drive me a little crazy.  It's ok if you don't know what something is, just stop acting like you do.

Also I wish it were easier to tell the native range of plants, since the ID's of plants include introduced/planted stuff it's hard to see the native range of any given species, which is a primary interest of mine, for that IUCN Red List or Plantmaps have been helpful, also ebird for birds is nice

[Silas_Sancona]

1 hour ago, Xerarch said:

I enjoy inaturalist a lot, I look at it all the time hoping beyond hope that some amazing species I've been looking for will pop up right where I'm hoping for it to appear .  Also I agree that you have to know what the site is good for and what it doesn't do.  The incorrect ID's though, yes they can be expected but why? I mean, if I'm not sure about what something is, I just don't say anything.  Why do people just willy-nilly throw stuff out there that is terribly and obviously false? It does drive me a little crazy.  It's ok if you don't know what something is, just stop acting like you do.

Also I wish it were easier to tell the native range of plants, since the ID's of plants include introduced/planted stuff it's hard to see the native range of any given species, which is a primary interest of mine, for that IUCN Red List or Plantmaps have been helpful, also ebird for birds is nice

I'm sure there is a group of folks who post stuff  there, just to rub the site the wrong way, like folks who believe everything is perfect in good in the world climate- wise..  Not sure why those " Awful and obviously  inaccurate " observations aren't wiped from the data base though..


There is an " introduced "  tag that is supposed to be used when posting observations of plants / animals not native to a particular area, but no clue how often it is actually used.  I myself have never had trouble with finding the ranges of various organisms, including things experiencing expansion.



E Bird is definitely great for bird observations, though i'm not thrilled they put the " explore range maps " data behind a subscription wall..  Folks gotta stop with the " subscribe to everything, just to access basic data " non sense..  I bird, but aren't gonna join some club just to fit in / look legit..  Subscribe to everything, just because someone thinks others should = Getting old, fast.