Lysmata wurdemanni Observation Refusing to Add to Map

Bug Reports
1

The following observation refuses to show up on the map for this species, even though it is RG: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/862742

https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/135293-Lysmata-wurdemanni

Is there something I’m missing or is this a bug?

2

Looks like a marker shows up for it if you enable the GBIF Network layer, but the iNat observation doesn’t show for me either.

Oddly, if you go to the Observations page and look at the map, the observation shows in the side-bar photos, and if you hover over the observation image the pop-up window appears in the correct location, but the blue circle to indicate the observation doesn’t show despite that.

Geoprivacy appears to be set to open as well.

3

I’m pretty sure it wasn’t even showing up on the observations before now. So that’s an improvement, I guess. Not sure how it happened. I unchecked “No, it’s as good as it can be” from the “Based on the evidence, can the Community Taxon still be confirmed or improved?” selection, wondering if that might affect something. It didn’t seem to. But maybe it made the observation show up, just not the dot? I have no idea lol.

4

Hmm, that’s weird, I guess it only shows up if I deselect the United States, even though it took place in Florida? Dot’s still missing though, you’re right.

5

I’m pretty sure this is due the enormous accuracy radius of the observation, which is 487 km. I can’t remember where the exact cut-off is, but observations lacking imprecise locations aren’t mapped on the taxon page.

1 Like
6

Lol yeah that sounds like that would do it. Is there any way to fix this or is it up to the user? Also, what exactly does that imply? Does that mean the location could literally be most of Florida?

7

Only the user can edit the location accuracy (and yes, precision would be a better term). You can comment or write a message to them.

Basically the accuracy circle says “I saw the organism somewhere within this circle”.

1 Like
8

There’s this, but I’m not sure what it means. If it’s based on degrees, the accuracy cut-off for being “mappable” will vary depending on where in the world the observation is.

it "should not be mappable with a terrible accuracy" do
  o = Observation.make!(latitude: 1.1, longitude: 2.2)
  o.update_attributes( positional_accuracy: o.uncertainty_cell_diagonal_meters + 1 )
  expect( o ).not_to be_mappable
end

Some of us have developed a few prompts to help users fix common issues like this: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/responses#locationinacc

1 Like
9

Ah nice. I posted a message to the user.