Ok, I was just about to link to my project - good that I read the whole thread 
It is however not the only project of this kind, and I did not come up with the idea in the first place.
It was not so difficult to create, as I am usually tagging all my observations where I am the first observer. So I could just go through these (ca. 250) observations and check if I am still the only observer. Using the Compare tool, I found some more species that I missed.
I actually just have lists with my firsts for different countries or generally for iNat… it´s fun, especially to see which one of those are now abundant on iNat after the first ID was made.
https://www.inaturalist.org/lists/ajott
There is still one or two that do not have any other pictures yet… basically all smaller animals (insects and gastropods):
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1147341-Ischnochiton-yerburyi
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1028502-Gyrinus-gibbus
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/762932-Kyphiacris-torquata#
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/107063-Nitia-teretiuscula
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1148857-Monodonta-nebulosa
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1127701-Laevicaulis-stuhlmanni-aegypti (there is 3 obs, but they are all from me)
Yes… mine are these:
Wow, I just noticed these are a lot!
Giraffe Cichlid: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/27244013
being boring, i would have titled this something like “(number of) taxa with only one observation”, which i think was the original intent of the thread, though it has now evolved into something a little different…
based on https://jumear.github.io/stirfry/iNatAPIv1_observations_species_counts.html?order=asc&page=114, there are currently 113 x 500 + 190 = 56650 “leaf taxa” in iNaturalist which have just one observation, out of more than 344000 leaf taxa observed (not accounting for the quality of identifications).
do people really do this? there are at least 885000 active species-level taxa in iNat and only 344000 “leaf taxa” observed. so given 500000+ species that “need an observation”, it seems like that’s a a little too many to just take a “i’ll try to observe one randomly selected from this list” approach. so then what kind of approach would someone take other than just focusing on a particular location or methodology that few other people focus on, or other than by just observing a ton, and seeing what randomly turns up from those efforts?
(raises hand hesitantly)
With limited success, admittedly, but it’s fun to look.
Then again, I’m a diagnosed OCD case and it really drives me nuts seeing things missing or miscategorized. So I’ll cross-reference checklists of things that might be in my region, or have been reported on other sites, with the inat species listings, and try to keep an eye out for them to fill in the gaps.
Most of my successes have been things I randomly stumbled on and identified later, but I did manage to hunt down the first observation for Asphondylia photiniae
sorry… i wasn’t trying to be judgy there. i was just trying to figure out how someone would even go about selecting a species to go hunting for from such a giant list. how did you decide Asphondylia photiniae was a good target to go hunting for?
No worries!
I was comparing Russo’s plant galls of the western US to the California Galls project, and noticed it wasn’t in the project’s observed species list. We have loads of the host plant (toyon) so I figured there was a good chance it’d be around here. I just started inspecting the berry clusters on every toyon bush I passed for several weeks haha.
ok. that makes sense. i guess having a good guide / inventory to start from helps. i wonder if there’s an efficient way to get a starting inventory from, say, GBIF so that you could get a good target list for any county or state?
This photo series of Nannium pusio was my first iNat first, and still one of my most exciting entomo-moments (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/59627332). I caught it barehanded as it flew past my head while we were having cocktails out on the deck with some friends.
I had another iNat first just the other day with Phaleria manicata (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102889055). I actually hope this won’t stay the “one and only one” observation of this species, as the photo quality isn’t great and these beetles are probably pretty common on the beaches in the Galapagos…people just evidently haven’t been looking for them.
19 Penstemon species only have one record on this site according to the genus page … https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/48367-Penstemon
… and 27 with 0, but that’s not super reliable. Here’s one with no observations that I’ve identified twice https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/166430-Penstemon-retrorsus
Yes, I seem to remember coming across some species in “explore” only to have the taxa info say there were no observations… it makes me wonder how accurate any of it is and where the error happened.
I have three of the Penstemon taxa listed by @egordon88:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/166322-Penstemon-arenarius
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/166341-Penstemon-concinnus
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/166431-Penstemon-rhizomatosus
A few more Nevada rare plants:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/158892-Astragalus-eurylobus
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/166595-Phacelia-minutissima
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/243029-Sphaeralcea-caespitosa-williamsiae
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/158848-Astragalus-callithrix
And a dune beetle:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/93420-Aegialia-crescenta
I also have two species with two observations, both mine:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/243291-Trifolium-andinum-podocephalum
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/147316-Sclerocactus-blainei
And this one counts for half. I’m not positive that Woody’s plant is the same species since it is dried up and there is an annual buckwheat in the same area that looks similar but has yellow flowers.
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/164244-Johanneshowellia-crateriorum
just to clarify, these are probably 2 different things that you two are talking about. it’s true that egordon identified 2 observations as Penstemon retrorsus, but those 2 observations are both currently at genus level, due to a disagreement in the identifications. (just in my opinion, the fact that P. retrorsus currently indicates 0 observations is not problematic.)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/38056293 (Moth bean) About 4-5 moths are identified as this plant daily, but they are corrected quite quickly, either by the observer or by 3 other IDers (e.g. https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/103804659).
For sure.
I’ve currently got six such robber flies in my observations, five are from the genus I revised for my dissertation. Only one of my six was from an exotic undersampled country (Mongolia); the other five are just from the USA. They’re also all taxa that have been known for decades; all the new taxa that I’ve personally described and put on iNat by now have accumulated more observations, yay!
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1129327-Asilella-londti
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1129356-Lasiopogon-albidus
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1255001-Lasiopogon-apache
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/823751-Lasiopogon-coconino
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/823755-Lasiopogon-ripicola
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/61703-Lasiopogon-shermani
I think all my observations are rather common, but I’ve been involved - albeit at a rudimentary level - with identifying some of the more uncommon Euxoa spp. This observation (Euxoa castanea from Canmore Alberta https://inaturalist.ca/observations/24712047)) is the only iNat record of the species, and a composite image of 4 moths probably contains an undescribed species! One of the advantages of being able to work with professionals.
That’s a good idea!
Right now I pretty much just thumb through guide books and look up whatever families seem interesting on iNat.
From this week’s identifier profile: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/99965651