If I could filter a search for “number of observations fewer than 2” it would help me make lists of creatures that need to be looked for more often.
A search for creatures with large numbers of observations could also be useful.
Frankly it could also help refine errors and highlight new developments that should be looked at with greater care.
I found a similar suggestion about making a filter for “rare” … but having a field that does a count query shouldn’t be that complex and then the number could be filled in by the person constructing the search.
Maybe I could download some data and make my own offline version for ants and then just post some lists?
If no obvious way available, you could export an area to a spreadsheet and use the spreadsheet summary feature to make a summary count for each taxon, then sort by the count
I made a site iNat Explorer to explore iNat data. Features included searching multiple taxa and places, and ordering the observations and species list. There’s a 13 minute demo video on the about page that covers how to use the site
Here’s a search for ants in New York State, with the species list sorted from low number of observation to high number.
Keep in mind that species with one or a few identifications may be rare, but these may also be misidentifications of more common taxa. So when looking at any set of “rare” species (as in, few observations), keep an open, skeptical mind regarding the identifications. Dig into the literature on such rarities (e.g. with the Biodiversity Heritage Library).
They could also be organisms that are common, but that not much is known about. There’s only one research-grade observation of Hansenocaris; as far as we can tell, these crustaceans are parasites of something, probably in the same way that parasitic barnacles live in crabs, but we don’t know what the host is.
how to find organisms with fewer than 2 but at least one observation is a totally different process than finding observations with 0 observations. what are you more interested in?
arguably, you’re usually very unlikely to find anything that is truly rare, but you don’t really need a target list to find things that others haven’t found. there are often things that people miss observing in your area for various reasons (ex. they don’t have the right tools, they don’t have the same interests, they don’t have access to the same spaces, they don’t have the availability to observe at particular times, they don’t have the same subject matter expertise, etc.).
if you’re just trying to gamify your experience, you can try things like:
