I need to spend some more time and then think about it before commenting.
I have not been using iNat App/Site for a long time (not even six months). Not also very frequently. So I can’t claim to have deep knowledge regarding this Platform.
I travel to different Wetland/Forest/River/Lakes/Breeding/Conservation centers/Zoological Parks etc of my country almost throughout the year with some specific pre-determined objectives since long.
It is not possible for me to observe, photograph and upload portrait type photos of all the plants, all the animals everywhere or to try to learn or memorize taxonomic names of all of them. I don’t have that much physical as well as brain power. Everyone can’t be everything.
I focus everywhere to achieve my small objectives only (fail in most though) which may require monitoring/observation of some other circumstances. It (iNat) definitely is giving me a lot of knowledge in my subconscious but I can say that after spending some more time here.
I started using iNat as a substitute for sporcle quizzes to test my fish knowledge, and I am so glad I did. There are a ton of even bigger nerds on this platform that have taught me volumes. Thanks to iNat I’m now much more familiar with IDing my local salmon species, indo pacific reef fish, most US game fish, and was inspired to get SCUBA certified! It has also become a substitute for the void in my life previously filled by video games which I’m very grateful for. It feels good going to bed each night knowing I helped at least a handful of people ID some of their photos, instead of a lazy couch potato.
Honestly, I can probably attribute the vast majority of my knowledge of local species to iNaturalist. I use it to find new places to explore by looking for places with clusters of observations and adding filters for the time of year or for specific taxa I’m interested in. It’s helped me find so many wonderful places, and I’ve become familiar with a good chunk of the biodiversity in Northern California along the way. I’ve had some really good conversations on the forum or directly on observations, too, and learned lot of interesting facts about the wildlife I encounter (for example, I had no idea that salamanders like to hide inside chanterelle mushrooms in the winter). The only drawback has been that I don’t get much exposure outside of my own geographic region unless I’m travelling out of state for work or vacation, so I’m basically back to square one when I go somewhere further away.
I wasn’t “baseline” in my knowledge about nature around me compared to laymen, but damn if I haven’t learned so much more and about how limited my knowledge was (the best thing about learning). Now I can give high level categorization to many common organisms, and I’ve learned how to more accurately ID species that are closely related (like the form and segmentation of their antennae etc.). And that some are just impossible to ID without a microscope or a gene sequencer (aphids come to mind). I also seem to notice organisms much more, especially plants.
As a certified plant biologist, I must say with great satisfaction that the portal is extremely useful to me in many respects, both scientific and general. For me, the portal is necessary to maintain an appropriate expert level and improve my existing skills in the field of systematic botany and general systematic biology.
I remain very much confused about this aspect. Perceiving everything Virtually and theoretically vs….Should identifying everything is the objective of a Naturalist? Can all the aspects of ‘Nature’ (aesthetic, abstract, philosophical, spiritual, complicated- if somebody feels in that way) be perceived or understood by reading books and watching National Geographic? May be Yes to somebody, may be somewhat Yes to somebody, may be No to somebody. There are several other words like Serenity, tranquility , ambience…
This site (iNat) is an outstanding and unparalleled site for learning many many aspects and obviously I have learnt a lot from this site (as well as from the Forum discussions). A Zoologist, a botanist, an Entomologist, an Ornithologist- everybody can easily relate it’s ‘beyond doubt’ excellence in their own way.
But has ‘my Nature Knowledge’ advanced since using iNat? It is a very difficult question for a common person like me. I know. without any doubt, that the answer will be ‘Yes’. But I have to think a more about it before I make any further comments detailing the same.
PS: I apologize for my limited English language skills. I may not explain many things correctly and properly as English is not my First Language.
Definitely has expanded my knowledge of plants and invertebrates since I’ve been primarily a vertebrate nerd since I was a kid. Maybe the highest compliment I can make for iNat is that it is my go-to reference when I’m uncertain about some organism. In the old days I might spend hours digging through field guides in my library to ID something. I might still do that occasionally, but those books have become secondary references.
(1) I managed to add identifications to insects previously unidentified on iNat by looking up original descriptions and using old keys and then doing journal posts.
That’s how I increase the number of species I am able to identify.
(2) I try to verify IDs by other users given for the first time or rarely recorded insects and looking up these ones is a cool learning curve.
Often when reading the old literature I find descriptions and illustrations and then check if this is amongst unidentified iNAt observations.
Or when I am done with an ID, I go on reading the entire monograph or paper and always learn a thing or two.
My first knowledge advancement was to learn where insect larvae have prolegs (I translated the table from the german wikipedia and put it into the corresponding english page). I learned to separate a few Brassicaceae (using the Rothmaler chapter), with the agenda to collect seeds and grow some tasty species (e.g. Sisymbrium loeseli) in my garden (often frustrated by the town officials having them mowed before the seeds are ripe). Recently I developed an intuition what Noctuidae and Geometridae look like (but only if they sit properly), allowing me to lift some unknowns a bit higher than just into Lepidoptera.
Your English is fine.
I am learning more about nature, since my weekly hikes overlap with most of what I ID on iNat. Those obs are, mostly, within my here and now.
But I can’t identify outside my area because I’m really only familiar with the organisms I encounter frequently. The best solution there is to travel farther afield, but there’s obstacles to that with the cost and the time required. Just trying to pick it up by looking through others’ observations without the experience of going out and seeing it for myself just isn’t as appealing to me.
Maybe not. But there are so many obs waiting for ID. What you are able to help ID will be appreciated by those observers. Just as you appreciate those who help, or confirm, IDs on your own obs. Observers and identifiers need each other for iNat to work well.
You can try broadening the location for where you ID. Just a little bit so the biodiversity remains similar.
further to my more general post above, I also joined several projects, and in order to provide good observations for these - pushed my own knowledge. A good example is the UK Coccinellid Challenge 24 project where the project team provided some reference material and I have become a confident IDer on a Taxon I previously knew almost nothing about.
Agreed! I was going to say that one thing I have learned is that many of the species I thought I knew are actually multiple look-alike species that I still can’t tell apart no matter how many good photos I take, or how many references I use.
Even within my beloved wildflowers, which I’ve been observing for lifetime. Six species of Ladies’- tresses (Spiranthes) in New England?! You gotta be kidding!
And don’t get me started on bees.
I have definitely expanded the range of what I am interested in. Now my stacks of flower guides have been joined by piles of books on bees, other insects, ferns, mushrooms, trees, shrubs, bark, birds, feathers, nests…
But I’m not certain I have actually expanded my knowledge, because it seems like for every new fact I stuff in my brain, and old fact gets lost.
