Hi, I’d like to suggest koyamaki, Sciadopitys verticillata. It’s a very unique-looking tree - relatively uncommon, but you occasionally see it cultivated as an ornamental. However, in my experience the AI never identifies a bona fide example as this species. It always suggests plants in the Pinaceae (often Deodar cedar, Cedrus deodara).
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/50834319
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/40904746
Just putting this out there, but Ceratostigma seems to never be identified as such by CV, it often goes for Hydrolea.
It looks like oxalismtp has gone through all of the Hydrolea misidentifications, which is good.
thanks!
Catharanthus roseus (Madagascar Periwinkle) can have white flowers with a red center, instead of the more common all-pink flowers. The computer vision is labeling these plants as Cerbera manghas (Grey Milkwood), which is a tree and has narrower leaves.
I have added Iresine diffusa to the list. Computer Vision often identifies as this anything with brightly colored leaves. This leads to all sorts of misidentifications, especially in fall.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=any&ident_taxon_id=130870&without_taxon_id=130870 is a good search to find all the ones already corrected, which might need a nudge or two to get them on the right track.
I’m getting anxiety from seeing so many planted plants not marked, please, as observers often have no idea about it - mark them as cultivated.
I just added three entries and they got deleted - can we discuss things before they get deleted instead of just being deleted with no other indication?
To view change notes on a wiki post, click the pencil/paper icon in the top right corner of the wiki, from which you can browse through the edits.
Nothing was deleted, your change is the last one.
Because I re-added some of the tings that had been deleted.
Nice to know that I can do that, but what I am asking is that maybe we should have a discussion here about why we should or shouldn’t deleted something before someone just goes and deletes it.
Ah, found it, it was further back than I expected.
Added Pleroma heteromallum. It has a bunch of synonyms, including Tibouchina heteromalla. (It’s a bit of a mess on iNat right now, because many of the synonyms (like this, this, and this) are currently listed as separate species.
It’s pretty distinctive - it has large leaves with short petioles and silky hairs, large clusters of flowers with relatively small flowers. It tends to be misidentified as Tibouchina urvilleana/Pleroma urvilleanum or Tibouchina semidecandra/Pleroma semidecandrum.
Sometimes Clematis gets misidentified as Tibouchina/Pleroma as well, but that’s a separate issue.
Would it not be best to make all needed taxon changes before cleaning this one up?
I suppose so. I will note that there are some observations where different synonyms are used (e.g. somebody suggests Tibouchina grandifolia, then somebody else suggests Pleroma heteromallum). These get automatically fixed, right?
Hi everyone, I’ve tracked down a bunch of (cultivated) Sciadopitys verticillata misidentified as other plants. This is pretty easy to identify - long thick leathery leaves (technically cladodes, but whatever) found in whorls. Reddish fibrous bark and distinctive cones may also help in identification. Here are some photos for reference.
Have to add that moss problem if changed not too much and Pseudanomodon attenuatus is still applied to any green moss sas it’s #1 suggestion and system doesn’t even suggest higher groups, only a bunch of species of mosses.
I added Pilea to the list. Two things to note:
Pilea peperomioides is commonly grown as a houseplant, but CV usually thinks it’s Hydrocotyle. This plant has peltate leaves with an entire margin and a circular-ish outline. (Note that it can be confused with some Peperomia such as P. polybotrya and P. tristachya, which have more pointed leaf tips.)
Meanwhile, Pilea cadierei seems to have the opposite problem: many plants with variegated white and green leaves are mistakenly identified as Pilea cadierei. I also came across a bunch of plants in Ecuador that I can’t identify, so if anybody knows that would be much appreciated!
Pilea peperomioides: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=casual%2Cneeds_id&order_by=updated_at&ident_taxon_id=125439&without_taxon_id=125439
Sorry, it appears I’ve severely missed the point of this thread. I’m supposed to be discussing identification in flags instead of in the comments 
I have another question though. Since a misidentification necessarily involves two taxa, which one do you put? If multiple species are mistaken for species X or species X is mistaken for multiple species, it probably makes sense to put the one species X. But what if species X is consistently mistaken for species Y?
Add one that is suggested by the programm, as those observations need revision.