Etiquette for ID of species with no visual differences

[edolis]

@kiwifergus

Perhaps a better “gratefulness” would be to iNat for bringing together both!

@edolis

but I also try to consider that this is a beautiful platform, that a lot of people me included try to promote it

Who’s ungrateful? More love declaration than that…
I am a plain user, that’s why I probably I appreciate the patience of expert who happen to explain the same thing over and over again. I sure annoyed some of them with my st Thomas grade doubts.

[mreith]

@sgene

Once someone pointed out that photos of a live animal weren’t really going to distinguish them, I happily called all of mine by genus alone.

Well I lack any experience with cotton tails. I just want to point out, that one can actually get a confirmed genus level ID to research grade, by clicking
" Based on the evidence, can the Community Taxon still be confirmed or improved?"
[*] No, it’s as good as it can be

[kiwifergus]

@edolis

I find this approach to debating the problems quite annoying and not proper for a community.
I see you are a curator, I would expect a bit more of restraint, probably your thousands of id makes you feel in the position to tell people to shut up which is an impression I got from the tone of replies from seniors in other topic to other inatters.

I think the problem is that you come across as a little bit obtuse… I’m not sure if it’s intentional or a language barrier thing. I wasn’t going to voice this opinion, but noticing that you mention you have similar reaction from others in other threads supports my perception. In this particular case, you ask a couple of questions, they are answered within 20 odd posts, and yet here we are 80+ posts later… You are right, I can choose not to reply and unsubscribe this thread…

[edolis]

I understand your input and approach…
But sorry I don’t feel it as a guideline… Sorry.
How it feels is not a precise rule for me personally and I don’t think it would be a palatable approach for the people like academics who want a more scientific compatible approach.
As I mentioned above, I don mean this guideline should be mandatory. I think it should be suggested to people willing to work neat neat (to make the best of their time) in a way which is respectful of academics.
This might be the reviewers, the front line massively crunching loads of id can of course feel free to fly higher of the nitty-gritty.

[edolis]

@kiwifergus

you ask a couple of questions, they are answered within 20 odd posts, and yet here we are 80+ posts later… You are right, I can choose not to reply and unsubscribe this thread…

Maybe because I have not yet read what I consider a valid answer and I am still gathering further elements?
See my reply to your OMG above.
I understand your confidence in your view, still is not bridging the gap. Because that’s the way things work currently and the annoyance expressed about species level id has been expressed in this same thread and I cannot see how your approach can fix that

[pisum]

it seems like this thread may have gone off the rails. this is just my opinion, but there may be something wrong if y > t / 8 + 3, where y is your posts, and t is total posts.

[upupa-epops]

I’m very unclear as to what you’re asking for. Based on the previous responses to this thread there is clearly a community consensus about what an identification should be, and it aligns with what is said in the official help page:

When you make an observation, identify the organism as best as you can, even if that is just “plant” or “bird.” … An identification confirms that you can confidently identify it yourself compared to any possible lookalikes.

[sgene]

@mreith

one can actually get a confirmed genus level ID to research grade

I did know this. When I ID my own observation to genus and someone else IDs to species, I have no trouble keeping my own ID at genus but I can’t bring myself to check this box because the expertise I would be relying on for that is not my own. So I really do think it would help overall to have more people who have studied these organisms tightening up the IDs.

[mreith]

Have a look at this observation @sgene ID to genus, but research grade: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/27735575

Its a good idea to get some observations to research grade, while at the genus level. These observations will no longer be found within the “needs ID” observations. Which means it is less likely, that somebody else puts a unsupported species level ID on them.

[sgene]

@mreith

Its a good idea to get some observations to research grade, while at the genus level.

I agree. Just have to figure out a way to get the right eyes on those before the species IDs are made, I guess.

[bouteloua]

I think this sums it up pretty well:
@edolis: “Trying to extrapolate a guideline but it looks really hard.”

There has been some good guidance in this topic about what can or should be done in specific examples, but there is no guideline that is going to apply the same to all taxa or observations.

I just wanted to chime in here with a reminder of some of our Community Guidelines:

• Be polite and respectful. Treat everyone like you would treat a stranger in person. Don’t forget that there are real people behind the usernames and profile pictures people use here.
• Avoid the use of CAPS, which on the internet are attune to shouting in someone’s face (consider bold or italics instead).
• If your emotions are running high, step away and let yourself calm down for an hour or even a day before responding (if at all, since you don’t need to have the last word).

I know for myself, there are some common discussion subjects that tend to frustrate me and I often just set those types of topics to “mute”. :) Just an option to look into if you haven’t seen it yet.

And finally, if a discussion is starting to turn into a quick knee-jerk back-and-forth between 2 people, going along tangents, consider moving it to the private messaging system available here on the forum.

Thanks for helping us keep the forum a respectful and inviting place.

[fffffffff]

It’s a good question how some well known birds get rg for different species (with nice photos).

[fffffffff]

Well, that button is genus-level without disagree.

[edolis]

@bouteloua is there any place I can read some documentation about Holding bins and the associated workflow (creation, use etc)?
I found just this https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/observation-field-standardization-wiki/380 but the description does not seem to fit the use I read in the links I posted here.
Was that an experiment? Is it running or obsolete?
Asking since I’m considering switching to the Holding bin+comment on genus id (the nasty one)+not improvable flag approach but of course this must be supported by curators.

[kaipatiki_naturewatc]

Sorry if this suggestion has been made already, but I just stumbled on the thread and as its rather long I just scanned it.

Here in NZ we have two native species of Solanum that can only be distinguished when in flower.

However, since it is significant that the specimen observed is one of those two, either Solanum aviculare or Solanum laciniatium, we like to have them identified to that level.

Both have the common name “poroporo” . So a Field has been created named “It’s a poroporo”, Values Yes or No.
Simply add that Field and select “Yes”.
This means it is possible to search for Observations with that Field, ie all of either species, where the Field has been added.

Perhaps a similar Field could be created for each of these indistinguishable groups, with the Field name “Either xxx or yyy”

[lotteryd]

I’m in the same position as paloma, learning (humbly) about many life forms day by day here, and also learning about how best to handle the tougher ids on this site.

For instance on the latter point, I recently learned that observations can be identified to Research Grade at the Genus level. All it takes is for someone to tick the “as good as it can be” box at the appropriate stage (ideally with a short explanatory comment about it).

Besides being scientifically appropriate, this choice removes the record from the Needs ID pool where it would still be “under pressure” from eager identifiers.

(I apologize if this has been discussed above, as the thread has gotten a little involved and I may have missed it.)

…Oops it was up there, sorry https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/etiquette-for-id-of-species-with-no-visual-differences/9513/89

[upupa-epops]

@edolis

Asking since I’m considering switching to the Holding bin+comment on genus id (the nasty one)+not improvable flag approach but of course this must be supported by curators.

Yes, this is appropriate if you are confident that neither you nor any other expert could confidently identify it to a single species.

Observations fields are a free-for-all. Technically anyone can create one for any purpose you want (as long as it’s not inappropriate). So if you think there is a need for a certain holding bin (it doesn’t already exist) and would be useful for you and others, go ahead. If you’re working with spiders for example, it may be better to communicate with arachnojoe and get the option added to his observation field which already exists for that purpose.

[cthawley]

In some cases, I would agree with this. However, the original scenario was laid out as “where there is no visual clue for the correct identification (precise determination possible only dissecting the specimen for instance)”
Without any info from dissection, I think it would be fair to ID to genus as a disagreement if this is known.

And more generally, I believe the negative consequences of mistakenly IDing to species are greater than the positive benefits (at least from the science side).

[Star3]

@edolis

But I feel this situation comes from the tension of the two different faces of iNat… someone approaches it with a scientific mindset (I’m sure it’s at least the feeling of people working with Natural Sciences)
other as a generic connection with nature who feel a “most likely approach” is good enough.

That’s a pretty big assumption to apply to all of us.
I am one such amateur looking for a connection with
nature and

1. “Most likely” isn’t good enough for me. When someone IDs one of my observations that I thought wasn’t distinctive to species I will comment to ask how they identified it before I agree with them. **
2. I am fine with higher level talons when that’s the best I can get with the evidence I supplied.

And, while I know you didn’t mean it that way, I am a little insulted that you think us amateurs can’t be satisfied with the ambiguity of a higher level ID.

** See the following examples, and I don’t think I am unique:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/10158335
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/11465458
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/35462695