With regards to searching for lists, I found that any taxon filter needs to be removed (even taxon branches that fully include the list you search with).
1 Like
Just to be clear, are you saying that the &list_id= parameter is incompatible with the &taxon_id= and &taxon_ids= parameters?
Oh sorry, yeah thatās what I meant.
Hello.
Thanks to @tiwane, @jdmore, and all the contributors before me!
Iām running searches for specific identifiers and I have all of the fields I want thus far except that Iād like the data paired with the coordinates of the original observation.
I can think of a couple of tedious workarounds, but does anyone know how I can add this (as well another field to indicate if the location is obscured/private/public) to my original query so that I donāt need to make this a multi-step process that will require later data integration?
Thanks in advance!
Can you be more specific? Is this an export query or Explore/Identify? What do you mean āpaired with the coordinates of the original observationā?
Iām exporting certain taxa observations to Excel based on who identified them.
My results are as I expect, but I donāt have any location data.
Sorry, Iām confused. The example you gave doesnāt export to Excel, itās just displayed on the page. If you choose to download via the export page, you should get a lot of options for the location data.
Sorry. To clarify, I am importing to Excel, using Get Data from web. It works! :)
I donāt see any option to Export once I have my selected observations (i.e., according to the url I provided previously). I only see an Export option when Iām starting off from doing an Observations search using the UI.
Oooh, youāre using Microsoft Power Query?
I guess Iām not sure why youād choose that over the built-in export page?
1 Like
From the Explore page, click the āFiltersā button, then click on āDownloadā in the lower right corner of the filters popup.
1 Like
Thank, @jwidness! I only knew that I could download from the filters dialog box when from the Explore page as @twainwright mentioned (and that method only allows for limited filters). I had no idea that there was a separate built-in export page, so Iāve been using power queries for any other filters Iāve needed. Oy vey!
1 Like
I built a browser extension that includes a filter builder UI that supports adding nearly all of these URL parameters. Iād love to get feedback from frequent users of these features and make sure everything you guys use is supported, add any additional clarifications youād suggest, etc.
2 Likes
Just to clarify: the āseparate build-in export pageā is exactly where the āDownloadā link in the filters dialog goes, but with any filters youāve already set pre-filled. I was just showing the easy way to get there without having to remember the page name.
1 Like
Is there a way to search for observations where I was mentioned?
Is there a code to exclude āuser has opted out of community taxonā?
2 Likes
no, please see details at https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/implement-a-new-filter-for-observations-that-opt-out-of-community-id/27053
1 Like
I was trying to annotate observations of Didelphis virginiana in Ontario as dead or alive. ā&without_term_id=17ā works as expected for hiding any observations that already have an alive or dead annotation.
However, I also wanted to exclude observations that were annotated as tracks, because thereās no way to know if the animal that left the track is alive or dead at the point that the track is observed. ā&without_term_value_id=26ā should be able to accomplish this. However, it doesnāt seem to work unless I also add ā&term_id=22ā.
Adding that filter shows only observations that have an evidence of presence annotation other than ātrackā, which does not include no evidence of presence annotation. Is it possible to filter out observations with a certain annotation value without restricting the output to only observations where that annotation field is filled?
Is it possible to exclude multiple taxa? It seems that ā&without_taxon_ids=366723,401581ā excludes only the first taxon and not the second.
Trying to unobscure needlessly obscured plant taxa, and have been doing so by looking at the explore map, and clicking through the obscured observations. Wanting to exclude rightfully obscured taxa though, and just pick through the ones that are needlessly obscured (and of course Iāll end up seeing user-obscured observations, but whatever).
use &without_taxon_id= (not ids)
1 Like
Is it possible to search for comments mentioning a specific word under observations of a specific taxa (preferably also on observations lacking an observation field)?
Specifically I am looking for observations of Trillium Grandiflorum that the comments mention mycoplasma that lack the observation field āPhytoplasma infection?ā