There are a lot of monotypic taxa on iNat, and there are also a lot of observations that get stuck on a monotypic taxa and never get identifyied because the taxon experts go to the subordinate taxon, not the monotypic parent taxon. In my opinion it does not make any sense having identifications be o…

I think the work should be done with educating identifiers about possibilities of missing many observation because of the taxon rank they choose and how it affects some species.

Yes, I am talking about higher monotypic taxa, in fact I did not mentioned the word “species” anywhere. One example of what I am talking about is for example the Subclass Equisetidae, that only have one genus (Equisetum), and there are 29 pages at this time full of observations (around 870 observa…

By the way something went wrong with taxon change for Equisetidae and many observations stuck at it while having species and subspecies-level ids.

I really think that in this case the best bet would be the page educating the identifiers. The amount of observations that fall in this problem is enormous, and the answer could be so simple if the page managed this mechanical and monotone procedure. It also could be enlightening for the user if an …

It happens with all iNat, if a subspecies level ID is added it stucks on the higher taxa, unless there are some identifications in the species level for that infraespecific taxon. An example outside Equisetidae for this: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/15355165

Thank you @lotteryd , I did not knew that post, but the thing is that Equisetidae is a extense example, but there are so many monotypic taxa that getting all of them into that list would be overwhelming and unnecesary in my opinion, and also they should be searched specifically for this, which would …

I was thinking that maybe it also could be added the “monotypic” taxa for specific places, like for example the only species for the genus Macroglossum in Europe is Macroglossum stellatarum. But this may have more problems and should have more research and thoughtfulness probably to be applied, wher…

That raised by pdfuenteb is an important need. It would be great if the proposed change of automatic identification of monotypic taxa could be implemented. (e.g. Boulardia that automatically becomes Boulardia latisquama)

Often when I am identifying and I think I know what species an observation is, but I’m not confident, I’ll just ID it to genus (sometimes with a comment indicating what species my guess would be) because otherwise the observer will just agree with my ID and the obs will become Research Grade even th…

Automatically identify monotypic taxa as the subordinate taxon

Feature Requests

lotteryd December 7, 2019, 1:58am 8

In the absence of a coded solution, some id’ing could be crowdsourced via a page analogous to https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/computer-vision-clean-up-wiki/7281 where people inclined to help can go see common examples.

Topic		Replies	Views
Don't suggest genus for monotypic genera (computer vision) Feature Requests	35	3366	April 28, 2024
Etiquette for ID of species with no visual differences General identification , etiquette	157	8898	January 23, 2020
Have leading subspecies IDs update Observation Taxon below species, even when coarser IDs present Feature Requests	21	573	April 9, 2026
Recognize the nominate subtaxon if you recognize any other subtaxon, always Curators	35	1060	November 24, 2024
Make 'Needs ID' Independent of BOTH 'Research Grade' AND 'Casual' Statuses Feature Requests	54	1138	July 9, 2024

Automatically identify monotypic taxa as the subordinate taxon

Related topics