OK, you probably know that when asked what could be concluded about the Creator from a study of his works, JBS Haldane proposed “an inordinate fondness for beetles.”
Given that we’re not creating but only observing, what sort of “inordinate fondness” do your top-10 observed species reveal about you? Seven of my 10 are species of Smilax (Greenbrier). I’m fascinated with the biogeography, ecology and morphological plasticity of these widely-hated prickly vines. Whenever I’m on a new trail I’m on the lookout for Smilax, and in my home turf I track them through the year. I’ve got other fascinations, but that one’s lasted the longest. How about you?
I have developed a real interest in treehoppers. They are mostly small but can be found everywhere, both adult and nymph forms are often colorful and/or strangely shaped and there are many different species.
Straggler Daisy has become a “pet native plant” for several of us here in Texas. It’s my #1 uploaded species. With just about any semi-benevolent conditions, it flowers throughout the year, grows low, and fills in empty space on roadsides, in lawns and gardens…and “wouldn’t hurt a flea”. It has become a “must document” taxon wherever I find myself in my Texas travels.
9 of my top 10 are birds, which I don’t think is at all representative of what I actually identify and observe nowadays. I can identify birds easily but I haven’t properly “birded” in a year or two.
My second-most observed species is Corbicula fluminea, which gives a little more insight into what I’m interested in. Mostly: freshwater bivalves. But, the next mollusk down my species list is in 31st place, and is a gastropod, not a bivalve.
Although birds come out on top on my list, I surely observe freshwater mollusks more than the average user. And, I don’t think I observe birds more than the average user. It just comes down to which ones are easiest to find, and which ones I end up spending time near. Although I’m more interested in mollusks than birds, chances are, I could spot dozens of bird in a field, and yet not find a single freshwater mollusk. I could go to a local park, and not find any mollusks. I could go to a pond, and still find more birds than mollusks.
Personally, I think identifications are more representative in general. They aren’t really as biased, because you can add identifications of any species to any observation across the world. Observations, however, are heavily limited to what you can find, and where you can go.
There are specialists and generalists in both observing and identifying, which makes the results different for everyone. Some people are even both. I’m a specialist identifier for bivalves globally but I’m a generalist identifier locally. In terms of observing, I’m definitely a generalist (although with a few biases)
I…uh…seem to like roadside weeds? Probably more a reflection of where I usually am (by a road, lol), more than anything. So many of them are quite beautiful when you take a close look at them, though!
I’ve got a smilax at #15 - Bristly Greenbrier - a fine weed indeed, but alas, the only species of smilax in my area! I’ve observed three or four other species of smilax elsewhere, though - they really are interesting!
Idk, these all seem pretty random to me. Maybe my favorite color is secretly orange or red?
Oh, I also just remembered that the Tulip tree has context; I wanted to map every tulip tree in an area before they fruited so I could easily find them and collect the seeds. If we don’t count it for being an outlier, then my next one is an eastern box turtle, so it doesn’t change much
I’m not surprised to discover that my top 10 includes 3 sp. of Bombus… I really am inordinately fond of bumblebees, despite being an amateur bee-watcher.
Not surprised by the birds, either; they’re easy to see year-round,
and I am very fond of them, as well.
But I’m quite surprised to see flowers nowhere near the top, because wildflowers are my true passion.
And I’m more than a little surprised to see so many white-tailed deer! Okay, they are ubiquitous around here, kinda like pigeons in a city park, but do I really have to photograph them all?
I hereby order myself to stop.
I should really do something about this native Oxalis and these other weeds before they turn my yard into a desolate wasteland of death. Maybe I’ll hire this lawn care service to infuse some life back into my yard.
Here are my top ten; I can say, without a doubt, that most of these I do not care for. I see them everywhere, so I have so many; I take pictures of everything.
At the same time, I adore the Double-Crested Cormorant. It may be their odd rectangle-shaped heads in flight or how their wing beats almost exactly match my camera’s shutter speed, but every time I see them I need to take a picture. I had one photo shoot with a pair in the fog that ended up with me getting around 60 pictures from all different angles…
Plus, you gotta love squirrels. I always find them in the best poses.
To edit this, I don’t mean to hate the rest of the species. I love them all! Except for the House Sparrows. They are pretty obnoxious.
That’s a good point. In my case, I think my ID’s probably match my observations – Smilax would come out on top. But that’s definitely not true for everybody.
My top ten probably reveal that I have a macro lens and that there is a distinct lack of charismatic megafauna here. Or maybe I just love how much we still have to learn about insects and molluscs.
Mine are just the most commonly seen and easy to photograph when I’m out and about hiking rather than of particular interest, although bald eagles and moose are always fun to see.
No no - from your top 10 observations, we can ascertain that you would be most keenly interested in observing a large bird perched on top of a member of the deer family!
Also, I like trees. Besides the four tree species in my top 10, if we assume that the algorithm ranks things arbitrarily when they have the same number of observations, we have to include everything with 3 observations. That adds a fifth tree species, the Giant Sequoia.
And yellow-flowered Cichoriodeae: besides the Taraxacum Section Mexicana seen here, including all taxa with 3 observations adds three more Taraxacum sections and Bristly Oxtongue.
I’m pleased to say that Pica pica and Corvus corone, are my top 2 species observed, long bumping down the previous 2 (though still remaining in the top 10), that were due to invasive species monitoring (Lantana camara and Acacia melanoxylon). What an injustice this was to something that I do for joy!
I am incredibly fond of corvids, for several reasons. They are handsome, playful, intelligent, and best of so incredibly abundant - they can be enjoyed everywhere!
The only other plant species in my top 10 is Quercus robur, a fair tree in itself, but more an attraction for the diversity that it hosts.
If I can speculate about future top 10s; in truth I prefer Quercus suber, but it hasn’t yet had time to bump into the top 10, but I feel that it might. The same with Ficus carica, with its utterly fig-like ability to simply grow directly out of walls and cliffs. In cities it grows almost as a ‘weed’ would.
And finally, while Bubulcus ibis is fast becoming one of my favourite birds, for similar reason to the corvids, plus also fabulously extravagent breeding plumage. I doubt that it will reach the top 10 because I spend much more time simply watching them, without interrupting the experience by taking photographs.
Mine show the common birds in the area, and that I really like cicadas. Cicadas are just cool and big bugs that make a bunch of noise. Most of the things I take photos of that are really interesting to me mostly never reach species level, research grade, or aren’t available in high numbers (or are found in positions 11-15).
I’m not surprised at mine: buckwheats, milkvetches, and a couple of other common native plants. The Argia vivida observations trace back to a couple of summers doing wetland surveys and the monkeyflower observations represent only a tiny fraction of the 30,000+ photos I’ve taken of the species while documenting its locations and habitats.
So many of them are quite beautiful when you take a close look at them, though!
