Do Diadasia need dissection to get to species? Or could I catch one and just refrigerate it to make it hold still for macro photos?
My IDs range across all the taxon levels. I will push to limits of my knowledge, and of my @mentions. I’m with you on - it’s a fern.
4 Likes
For the cactus and globemallow specialists, these are the kind of characters to determine species. Microscope probably necessary.
https://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20q?guide=Diadasia&mobile=1
1 Like
Does this also work with opted out observations?
I know it works with non-opted-outs.
I did slow down on IDing a bit this week… so I am still very much busy with north american pisaurids (manged to do 27 pages this week… still 649 to go ;-))
But we are now 3 power IDers on different sets on spiders in North America and we are tagging each other all the time to push cases with disagreements to RG, which is a ton of fun.
4 Likes
For a moment there, I was thinking, “Cacti and globemallows have ocelli??”
1 Like
Ah okay so dead specimen would probably be easiest. I don’t like to kill them, but I spend so much time outdoors, once in a great while I find them naturally dead.
2 Likes
I understand. Best times to collect are end of the season (they die anyway) and I don’t feel too bad about grabbing a single male if they’ve been out and mating for a few weeks. It’s a tougher decision with species like Ripiphorus beetles, because the male lifespan is only a few days, so you might not have a second chance but you don’t want to interfere with mating chances.
5 Likes
Yep, it’s like being “on hiatus” either way, and I have seen it work when someone comes back and addresses their records even after a couple of years. Then the Casual-stowed obs goes right into its current taxon. :)
It’s probably some of the edge cases in our various urls. So, whoever gets to the end of their version of their big pile first, just go onto another person’s url and report back to the rest of us on what you think makes the “leftovers” different!
It may take a little while on that first part though. ;)
1 Like
I wish to show my solidarity, I’m going to spend this week iding everything from the regions that suffered from today’s earthquakes, that’s a tragedy, as we can’t do much more from where we are, let’s do at least that.
8 Likes
A question: When you are looking at an observation via the Identify tab, is there a way to see what projects an observation is in? I think I’ve clicked all the buttons, but can’t find a way.
It’s Friday and I’m just checking in. Still identifying Unknowns, still waiting for that big pile to disappear, but I’m keeping on regardless.
4 Likes
Hmm, I doubt the unknown pile will disappear anytime soon…
Well, something has to keep me out of trouble…
7 Likes
I keep working on a new project, so again wouldn’t mind if you helped with getting needs id down. https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?project_id=bioraznoobrazie-dereven-ryazanskoy-oblasti
Chewing away on those pisaurids in the US… 524 more pages to go. But the nice thing is, that most of them can indeed be pushed out of the “needs ID” pile … with the help of 2-ish other identifiers I am tagging away like crazy … and they do the same for their pile…it´s really fun :-)
4 Likes
Thank you (and your co-identifiers) for putting in so much effort!
3 Likes
Just a heads up for if someone goes into old Unknowns and sees a ton more of hard-to-assess obs than there were last time- a good chunk is my fault. ;) I recently went through https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/no-evidence-for-an-organism to unmark all my prior “no evidence” marks in there, to reevaluate them. Here are typical categories if you end up pitchforking at these too:
Issue: User notes a creature of some kind, but it’s not visible or really blurry
My workaround: Give it a coarse matching id, click “no evidence” and paste this:
“given your comments I’ve marked this for a creature but as “no evidence”, since it’s not visible in the shot; this way it can still be a memento record of your sighting”
Issue: User notes they are focusing on rock(s)
Solution: Mark “no evidence”, or if fossils are visible mark “no recent evidence”
Issue: Landscape type shots with nature visible
My workaround: Mark as Life and hope someone else will also mark Life and “good as can be”
Issue: Landscape or other type shot with notes and/or equipment suggesting it’s a survey/experiment/marker location
My workaround: Mark as Human, since the thrust is “artifactual” and/or for a human activity
Issue: Dirt/debris type shots, organism not visible, no user notes for clarification
My workaround: Mark as Life and hope someone else will also mark Life and “good as can be”
Issue: Appears to be a Duplicate
Context: After old duplicate workarounds with DQAs and flags, staff recently asked us not to use DQAs or flags for those
My workaround for now: “fail upward”, id’ing at least coarsely until user corrects or staff enables a solution
Other people’s current workarounds for now: Disagree with any existing id and mark as Life, I guess with a “good as can be” DQA?
On the last one, if you come across mine in the coarse piles, just disagree to Life if you want after my id, I won’t contradict that.
Did I forget anything?
1 Like
That is a misuse of DQA. If you know that it is a duplicate of something identified finer than Life, then by definition, “Life” is not as good as it can be. If you know which observation it is a duplicate of, then you know that it can be identified at least as far as that other observation was.
1 Like
(Any) two IDs, plus Good as it can be = Casual.
Taking it out of Needs ID, till the observer resolves duplicate, or multiple obs which should be combined.
It a workaround using the tools that iNat has available. For identifiers who are each tackling their chosen slice.
1 Like
I’m curious about your dirt/debris workaround. Why do you ID it as Life, rather than marking the DQA to indicate no evidence of an organism? The first option requires a second observer to provide an ID to move the observation to Casual: the second option moves the observation to Casual right away. Maybe I’m not understanding something?
1 Like