Bee and wasp checklists

You don’t really have to put anything in description, same with status (which is useful, but used rarely, so if you don’t know what to use, left it blank).
I don’t think checklists have any effect on suggestions, observations are needed.

I think @annkatrinrose was referring to the suggestions in Identify, not while uploading. You do have the option to filter by checklist there. I don’t know how it works though; I’ve never used it.

Ah, then I just don’t know about it, sorry.

Yes, and I think I just figured it out - I was at county level, but the checklist is at state level. Once I changed the filter from county to state, all the non-CV stuff from the checklist popped into the suggestions list. Nice!

Another thing I noticed is that some suggestions appear twice, presumable one from the default list and the second one from the specialized checklist. Haven’t been able to figure out yet if there is a way to get suggestions from the specialized list only, excluding the default list and eliminating the duplicates and genus-level suggestions.

1 Like

Updating. Sorry for confusion or if anything needs to be redone/undone. It’s confusing since there are two ways to create lists: adding spp. to all-wildlife list Places have, or creating a specific named-list separately. The specific lists can’t add certain spp. (error message: “sp. isn’t in taxon: bees”), and cause spp. duplicates in Identify Suggestions. Bug report here. I now think the first simpler method is best, for now. Identify will work identically.

That said, I’m open to suggestions, feedback, disagreement, advising, or if anyone wants to get more involved in managing this. I also mentioned this to the beemonitoring listerv, and additional researchers will help or send checklist data in time, some which I can share with anyone interested. Although optional, it can also help to contact published checklist authors and additional relevant researchers, at least over time to help verify lists. For example iNat @johnascher has worked with the Discover Life lists and US States, so would be good to discuss with for certain lists.

@nashuagoats created a checklist for the bees of PA. I updated the wiki. It’s a great resource for the 436 species documented in PA. This was done as a separate “bees of PA” checklist, so it will have the duplicate issue as described above and in the bug report.

1 Like

One thing to consider (correct me if I am wrong here) is that, as well as our additions, the complete flora and fauna checklist from Places will have new species to that place added as observations occur (within computational time frame) by the iNat framework rather than manually for that place. Vagrants and previously unknown established species will become incorporated as observations are made. Specific named-lists have the limitation, I believe, in that new species will need to be manually added.

For British Columbia, when I added the species to the complete flora and fauna checklist, I used the source I mentioned earlier here to add to that list - at that time I was unaware of the specific named-lists. The shortcoming of this is that credit for the original source is not given.

That’s true, Place lists auto-update from RG obs., which is one of their advantages. For citations I’m now adding the links next to the locations in the list above, and a general Acknowledgements section (which could list individual people/sources in theory too, if ever wanted). There’s also a third method which would be adding citations to Notes in a Place’s Checklist page.

What I’m finding at least for many of the locations is iNat actually has found spp. never before recorded in other sources, so that makes the iNat work (including creating these lists) part of the credit too, at least in a minor sense. If any prefer, they could add comments to mention lists they made or add their name or initials next to them in the list too, although I haven’t. I’m open to any feedback about citation/credit in the future too, to ensure it’s given properly.

To update, we can all resume on any lists when free to, including on our own (it’s only optional to have others verify them, although greater collaboration could help). Even some incomplete lists are still helpful for Identify.

I tried Identify Suggestions in some of the places and it’s working. So far, many spp. (though in some not all) were added by multiple people to IN, ME, NH, NY, PA, HI, BC, and small islands in multiple continents.

These Discover Life checklists are good sources for most country locations, or to come up with an idea of where to create a list. If creating a list with them, also add any more spp. listed by iNat, Bug Guide, or scientific publications (if any more spp).

For wasps, publication checklists seem the best/most complete sources, and sites like Cat. of Sphecidae and Wasp Web are also good. Some papers give location lists for all Hymenoptera or all insects, which can be found by search terms in Google Scholar (same for bee papers). For example, a few publications from Scholar could be combined to compile a list of all HI wasps.

Love this idea! Would absolutely love to see a Michigan checklist.

1 Like