I have seen a lot of mention of observation associations and interactions. I am interested in getting the plant information of what the butterfly has landed on. I have done it two ways so far but it is asking for the observer to take an extra step.
add one observation of a butterfly and use an ‘observation field’ like “plant settled on”. The concern here is that the plant name may be incorrect and will never be graded to research grade.
add two observations (can be same photo) and make one observation for the butterfly and one observation for the plant. Add a ‘observation field’ like “plant/butterfly association” and ask the observer to copy and paste the respective iNat urls to each.
Any other options? Am I missing something basic here? I really apologize but I got overwhelmed researching the forum for 'association/interaction" options.
Actually option two does not help when downloading reports. all I will get is the url of the plant but not the plant name? I can’t be clicking on 1000s of urls to go the the observation and find the associated plant name
Being devil’s advocate, there are a lot of things that would be useful to a few people that would be extra work for a lot of people. Before iNaturalist, if one wanted to study plant/butterfly associations, they needed to spend hundreds of hours in the field, traveling around the state or country or world (at great expense). Now, one only has to sit in the comfort of your home with a cup of coffee seeking those associations by scrolling through an amazing collection of observations. Yes, it would be even easier if the associations that you were seeking were already done for you and obtainable with just a single click. But that requires the extra coding, extra complexity added to an already complex interface, and volunteers to manually add those associations. In the end, there will still be LOTS of associations that volunteers don’t manually add, so there would still be lots of manual curation that you’d need to do yourself.
Ooh, I didn’t know that there was a field for that – I’ve been adding the URLs for associated observations to the notes on each one, but adding to observation fields as well might make them easier to find for people searching via annotations. Thanks for the tip!
Unfortunately, you can only use the associated observation observation field once per observation, so if you have more than two associated observations, it is probably best to set up links in a comment.
Also, most people are not going to notice the observation field anyway, so if you use that tactic, it can be helpful to mention it in the notes.
Here’s a thread that describes how to use “Similar Observation Set” which I often use when I come across the same organism over time to observe it grow. I also use it when both taxa are in the same photo for instance fungi in dead a pine tree or a spider with prey. I make two observations. One for each and link them with the observation field.
So…other than using a field to link one observation with another - I thought I would just share what I ended up doing. Note that I am interested in the butterfly and the plant the butterfly is ‘settled’ on. I will use observations fields however to get people to enter ‘feeding, resting, laying eggs’ etc. Just search for Observation Fields starting with DSF for some examples.
With regards to linking the plant observation and butterfly observation, I have devised a method whereby, as long as the observer 1) first takes the butterfly observation, then 2) takes another observation of the plant immediately afterwards (within say 60 seconds), I can then extract all butterfly observations, all plant observation for a given time and for a given area and merge them into a spreadsheet, it is then a simple exercise of scanning the spreadsheet for two observations that a) are from the same observer, AND b) are within 60 seconds of each other, AND c) one is of a butterfly and one is a plant. Presto - we have a link. The two observations are in essence the same and we now have the butterfly and plant as separate iNat observation which means both could be research grade. By adding the plants as an observation field, it will never be research grade. Feel free to reach out to me privately if you want to know more :-) but I think this will work, as long as I provide the training beforehand. Also, it can be same photo, duplicated.
ok this is interesting and might work. thanks t_e_d! i would need to extract all observations and filter on the photo url. if the photo had multiple observations associated with it - i have a ‘association’. I like it!
Not sure? How does a plant become captive? I believe it is because it is a “duplicate”. The original butterfly observation is research grade, and all I did was duplicate the observation and renamed it by the plant name - see the two urls higher up. This seemed to force it as casual.
In iNatese ‘Not Wild’ is Captive / Cultivated (animal or plant) - and that becomes Casual (= Not Wild).
Your Buddleja has an i for Introduced - if you mouseover the i you get the popup info.
If you scroll down to Data Quality Assessment, you can again mouseover to see that ‘Not Wild’ is automated from iNat, since the plant is introduced.