Dual IDs, negative IDs, and making leaving it at the genus level feel better

General
62

I think lorb’s suggestion is really great. I also feel that the cheerful green “research grade” tag is an incentive. Listen I’m a school teacher who has also taught college and people are more motivated by gold stars than anyone likes to admit even adults who are serious people.

I know better but still feel bad that a few of my observations aren’t “research grade” – but, when it comes to doing research multiple people confirming that it’s “Complex Formica pallidefulva Pallidefulva-group” is just as good as narrowing it to a species if that’s all that can be done.

Let me share an illustrative observation. I really learn a lot from the other ant people on here and learned a lot from the comments on this observation. But look at how we are going in circles:

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/151521211

At first glance this might look like a big “science fight” but I think everyone is acting is good faith. We have a good photo. Just maybe not “good enough” to get a species ID. And this is tricky call. In some ways everyone wanting to agree on it being just one “final answer” is causing more of a problem.

We also have people with different levels of experience in different areas. No one likes being wrong.

As I look at the debate over this cute little ant I’m glad it is preserved since I think it shows how hard this can be. I could also see just having the ant have two IDs one with a much higher confidence might be a better solution. After all, species isn’t as precise and pristine of a matter as we like to think of it. There is blending, groups and keys and descriptions are always being revised.

If someone saw a little red and black ant in NYC 20 years ago it would mean something different than it means today because even populations are not static.

How could the system help us to strive for precision but not ignore ambiguity?

63

I also wanted to share a thread because I’m curious if it’s ever like that with birds. It think most people come here for the birds, right? (this amazes me)

64

Plants, then insects, then birds (but various people prefer other sites for Their Birds)

65

Birds tend to be less problematic than insects and arthropods etc. I can’t think of any bird where genital dissection is required to tell the species!

The two biggest issues with birds are blurry photos and hybrids. Hybrids are a perennial issue in the animal kingdom and cause all sorts of headaches for CV if included.

Birds also have ring species. In the UK there are the Herring Gull and the Lesser Black-Backed Gull. Clearly distinct species here and easily told apart with grey and black backs/upper wing surfaces respectively. However go opposite ways around the North Pole and there’s a continuum of gulls that are intermediate forms. This dichotomy is the sort of thing that gives taxonomists and CV maintainers headaches.

Blurry or indistinct photos are a curse in the area of warblers in particular. Try telling a Chiffchaff apart from a Willow Warbler with anything but a very good photograph! Yet hear them sing and it’s easy.

I came across an interesting wasp ID headache a couple of days ago. Two species from different genera where the males cannot be told apart photographically and the only way to tell the females apart is that one species has a completely straight ovipositor and the other has a slight bend in the end of its one.

Fortunately I’d photographed a female and had a clear shot of the ovipositor. Only reason I knew that much was checking websites and a field guide. Shows the importance of not jumping in feet-first with an overly specific ID and also the importance of fixing this issue.