Hi I recently came across two organisms that are not “classically” observed ( no actual observation of the organism) but are inferred from their host, or their hosts association. I don’t think these should merit an observation and i will try to make my point with examples. but first lets look at …

With disease, if the specimen shows the symptom of the disease (virus, whatever), I think it’s totally reasonable to ID as the disease. For instance, Covid tests are evidence of Covid (even though the viral particles aren’t visible). Scientists make their own IDs of endosymbionts that cause disease …

You have a point. Though personally I quite like the addition of the Bracoviriform glomeratae on my lifelist. I have observed the life-cycle of Cotesia glomerata (by the way, it parasitises Pieris brassicae and not Papilio machaon) and when somebody suggested the virus- of which I didn’t know before…

[image] guryonatan: what’s the point in observing them both ? In my view the point is learning. Seeing such observations/“observations” can open up a whole new world to iNatters, it can inspire deeper learning, new passions and help users have more encounters with nature by sending their sea…

What is the point of posting these redundant observations, even though they are worthless to science? I think the answer is hidden in the description of iNaturalist: “iNaturalist is a lot of different things, but at its core, iNaturalist is an online social network of people sharing biodiversity inf…

I think posting the observation for the endosymbiont as well as the host is fine. Do not, however, post observations for chloroplasts or mitochondria, for two reasons. First, both occur in all (or very nearly all) individuals of the host species. Also, both have mutated and lost genes to such a g…

[image] jlisby: My opinion is that such observations are reasonable if someone has made a particular effort to observe the symbiont as separate from the host - e.g. they have done microscopy of the photobiont layer of a lichen or the bacteriocytes of an aphid, etc. If its presence is merely infe…

[image] jlisby: I think this situation is quite different from the situation of a beaver-felled tree. An observation of a birch does not imply the presence of a beaver - only birches with the specific signs of beaver interaction do. Meanwhile an aphid will always mean Buchnera, and a Graphis wil…

I am now considering opening a feature request to have every observation of a species that reliably implies another species to automatically create an observation of the second species. Wouldn’t that be cool? But I think I know how that would go :)

I think they merit an observation if the observer wants to make an observation for it. iNaturalist is about connecting people to nature and their personal experiences with it, if that connection or experience is taking note of an organism implied by another organisms existence, be it a parasitoid v…

"observing" unseen Endosymbionts. Should they merit an observation?

General

gerrit_oehm January 26, 2025, 4:10pm 10

@ guryonatan See maybe also the related discussion here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/observations-that-obligatory-imply-the-presence-of-another-species/40933/9

Topic		Replies	Views
Observations that obligatory imply the presence of another species Nature Talk	10	611	April 26, 2023
Effectively eDNA observations - what to do? General	19	492	August 22, 2026
What is evidence? General	60	8110	August 5, 2021
What is an observation? General	45	7768	July 24, 2019
Observing Every Organism - Is it Beneficial? General	24	1345	May 16, 2024

"observing" unseen Endosymbionts. Should they merit an observation?

Related topics