I’m not saying they should be described as different species, since it’s up for debate if chickens are Gallus gallus domesticus or Gallus domesticus. I’m saying the site should treat them like they’re different species. Then it wouldn’t be a problem that INat doesn’t recommend taxa below species, and it would be clearer that a chicken is not a junglefowl.
Most domestic species on iNat are just that, species, it’s really a bunch of birds that are “left out”. iNat tries to treat things taxonomically correctly, and won’t go on changes for convenience, it’s same with many polyphyletic groups, it’d be easy to use, but staff is against it, so it won’t happen.
1 Like
So, in trying to maintain taxonomic accuracy, iNat is misrepresenting countless domestic and wild species. Leading to confusion in citizen scientists.
I don’t get why iNat can’t just keep the subspecies status for domestic animals and recommend them as IDs. Domestics are very different from natural subspecies, and perhaps should be prioritized over them.
The relationship between domestic animals and the environment is also very different from any subspecies. A domestic Mallard crossing with a wild Mallard would be considered a negative while the same happening for a Greenland or Holarctic Mallard would not.
iNat should suggest any plausible rank, I know it suggests complexes sometimes, so why not suggest taxa below species? It goes with any ssp. really, iNat treats them as something below par.
ID’ing to a subspecies appears to be a matter of contention on iNat, with many accepting ID’ing as a subspecies coming down to personal opinion. It may be because this disagreement between users that iNaturalist doesn’t require a subspecies ID. I haven’t found an official reason for why iNat does this.
Even so, I think domestic animals would have there own category, similar but not the same as a subspecies.
If iNaturalist doesn’t change the status of domesticated animals, they could at least inform users on their existence and how to ID them through the Help function. It’s easier, though less reliant, than updating the entire ID system.
Wild-type Red Junglefowl are introduced in Georgia.
1 Like
Well, variety or form are similar to ssp., so what’s the problem?
The problem is, as stated before, subspecies are boomed to obscurity unless an identifier already knows the subspecies exists or comes across a subspecies ID. Besides for those two situations, domestic animals as an ID aren’t likely to be known or picked.
I would also wounder how breeds of animals would factor into this argument.
Breeds are not taxa and iNat doesn’t recognise or use them.
I know, and I think that the way iNat handles breeds is correct. I’m saying that breeds are a trait that distances domestic animals from other subspecies.
At the end of the day, if iNat chooses to continue with the subspecies approach, they need to do a better job of educating citizen scientists on domestic animals. I would recommend discussing:
- Identification
- Function
- Wild vs Captive
- Key breeds
They could add a topic on domestic animals to the help function and/or in an easy-to-access journal entry.
It’s an interesting problem, because iNaturalist functions with a hierarchical taxonomy, and in that taxonomy, reflecting evolution, domestic chicken is nested within Red Junglefowl. Perhaps at some point a “show domestic” option might be made available in filters, to allow domestic subspecies of chickens, pigeons, etc. to be shown or hidden.
You can search for just Red Junglefowl identified at species level, excluding those identified as domestic chickens, by specifying Rank: Low = “Species” in the observation filters. This will still include lots of chickens, but then it’s onto us as identifiers and observers to add a more specific ID, or mark as captive.
If anyone wants to work on these IDs, here is an identify link for birds identified no lower than species level as Gallus gallus - but beware of assuming that birds outside of native range are domestic chickens (conversely, just because it’s in Hawai’i doesn’t mean it’s an introduced Red Junglefowl).
1 Like
If someone does this, be aware that the “wild-type” Red Junglefowl are introduced in Georgia (the US state, not the country) and Hawaii (although Domestic Chickens are also introduced there, so be careful).
2 Likes
Yeah not always easy to separate. I thought I photo’d introduced Jungle Fowl in Hawaii but that record was reidentified as domestic chicken. Looked wild type to me but I’m no chicken expert.
Since domestic chicken apparently has a hybrid origin in Gallus — a couple of other congeners were involved and contributed genes — perhaps recognizing Gallus domesticus as a separate species isn’t so far-fetched.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.