Observation Stuck at Phylum

I can’t see any reason this observation: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/25510873

shouldn’t be at species level, but it remains at phylum.

It shows up as RG at species for me.

Thanks - someone added another agreement species ID after I posted here, and that brought it to research grade.

So now I see that it wasn’t research grade at species because the phylum ID is considered a disagreement with Osmundea spectabilis. However, I made the phylum ID as an explicit disagreement with the original species ID, not the latter one. So, it still seems like there’s an issue I don’t understand.

Why is my phylum (Rhodophyta) ID considered a disagreement with the later species IDs that are in that phylum?

By backing up the ID and disagreeing all the way to phylum, you’re also disagreeing that the observation is in the class Florideophyceae. So, at the time of your post, there wasn’t the >2/3 community agreement needed to reach Research Grade.

The original ID was Corallina officinalis, which I was confident was incorrect.

I didn’t know what group it was below Rhodophyta, so put that in - explicitly disagreeing with Corallina officicinalis

If I’m understanding you correctly, this also implied that I was explicitly disagreeing with Corallina, Corallinoideae, Corallinaceae, Corallinales, and Florideophyceae, and that my ID of Rhodophyta would subsequently be counted as disagreeing with any subsequent ID within any of those groups?

Usually for red algae I disagree by putting in the phylum (since I don’t know them by more refined groups very well), and don’t remember seeing this happen before. I’m also a little puzzled that despite being counted as a disagreement with the community ID, my ID is still tagged as improving.

One thing I noticed, is that my ID and hfb’s subsequent species ID came in very close in time (~1 minute apart) - is it possible that my phylum level ID got flagged as disagreeing with hfb’s ID also, somehow?

1 Like

This is right. A few times a week I have to go in and withdraw my disagreeing ID because while I knew the original ID it was incorrect, I didn’t know that the subsequent, correct ID was actually in the same tribe/subfamily/family/etc as the original, incorrect ID.

That is a bit confusing. I feel like a disagreement should only apply to the lowest ‘leaf’. If I know something isn’t a maple and put it in as ‘plants’ with an explicit disagreement with Maple it shouldn’t be construed as ‘not a dicot’, i don’t think.

1 Like

Thanks @bouteloua - I hadn’t realized this previously. I do a fair amount of IDing but mostly not disagreeing, so I guess I just haven’t run into the issue (or at least not noticed it) before. It’s not how I would have intuitively expected things to work.

1 Like

I want to make a feature request for this too but I haven’t gotten around to it.
Offer the ability to hard disagree or not to the next finest level that the current identifications support, when one disagrees with the current community id. There seems to have been a gaffe, when a bunch of blues (butterflies) were id-d as frogs. I id-d many as butterflies, not intending to contradict their id as blues, just not support it. But I have no option to put this butterfly id in as supporting butterflies, not blues, and definitely not supporting frogs. IF I remove the butterfly id, the obs goes back to Animal, as the frog id is still there, and there isn’t any prompt generated by removing and then re-adding it.
This would be better if instead, on adding a butterfly id, the system computed, as it did, that the new community id was lepidoptera, and that there was still some disagreement, since every other lepidoptera id was of blues, and so now mine is disagreeing with the new majority (of those agreeing with the community id), and ask me whether I meant to disagree explicitly.
You need to calculate community id not just with my id, but also what the community id without my id, but descendant of my id / compatible with my id, is.
Tl:dr; Butterfly cannot but disagree with frog, but it is possible for it to agree with more specific butterfly ids.