Poll - How many people seek out "unknown" observations to ID?

[sedgequeen]

It’s interesting reading about how others approach identifying observations on iNaturalist! Right now just identifying observations of the people I “follow” takes a lot of time, because some of them are prolific posters. Sometimes I’ll work on a taxon that I know has trouble. (This is the most useful approach for me, I think, but lacks diversity.) Sometimes I’ll search on unknowns. Often I’ll just work on whatever recent observations “identify” throws up, though I know that’s where I"m least useful because some, like birds, will be snapped up quickly if I don’t do them.

[cecildomyiidae]

I like to look for “unknown” observations like this, but is there a way to search for them specifically? I’m still a bit new to this, but since you can’t search for “unknown species” like you can search for other taxa, I wasn’t sure how to go about it. (I also started off using the app and am just starting to get familiar with the website, so it could just be a matter of limitations there.)

I realized it’d be possible to make a project that collects at least almost exclusively “unknown” observations though, if you leave the “include” field blank and then exclude all the kingdoms. Do you think that’d be useful to do so they could be found easily and at least given coarse ID’s? I was thinking about doing that.

[tiwane]

@stevejones

Lately the number of observations has since overwhelmed me. But every so often (once or twice a week) I’ll filter by unknowns from the state.

@stevejones the end of August saw Arizona visited by a good number of big iNat users, I’m curious if things have calmed down since (although @silversea_starsong might still be adding observations). And thanks for your IDs on my observations!

@arboretum_amy

if you have a minute, can you explain how the unknown category leader board works?

Sure, I’ll get back to you Monday, I want to double-check with our developers about it.

@cecildomyiidae

I like to look for “unknown” observations like this, but is there a way to search for them specifically?

Clicking on this icon will show observations marked as unknown, as well as some other taxa that are not “iconic” taxa.

[graysquirrel]

About half my ID efforts go into Unknowns. It’s fun, because I never know what I’ll run into, and there are some really great observations buried in there. I’m trying to work my way through the 42,000 unknowns in california right now. A lot of the time I can only add a broad category, but often someone else will quickly refine it to species once it gets out of the Unknown limbo.

[graysquirrel]

@arboretum_amy

The leaderboard exists, but it’s nonsensical. In my county it says you are top at 31 IDs and I am second at 12. What’s that supposed to mean? Why 12 out of the hundreds I have done?

The leaderboards seem to check the category of the observation first, and then count how many IDs you’ve done of things that are within that category.

If you ID an unknow, and that ID puts it into another category, say “dicots” then that will not count towards the “unknown” leaderboard, because it’s no longer in the “unknown” category. Your number on the “dicot” leaderboard will increase instead.Your 12 IDs are the observations where your ID was not enough to remove the observation from the Unknown category (usually because someone turned off community ID).

[arboretum_amy]

That’s what I’ve as thinking, but as leaderboards go, it isn’t very fun or informative! It would be cool if the system could show you how many things you labeled eventually made it to research grade.

[blue_celery]

I “explore” iNat using some boomarks saved in my browser (e.g. all the observations of wild organisms in Italy). So, I do not specifically seek unknown observations but I always take a look at them and, if possible I try to identify them.

[graysquirrel]

@arboretum_amy

It would be cool if the system could show you how many things you labeled eventually made it to research grade.

That would be really cool to see! I wonder if there’s a way that could be done without having to re-do how leaderboards work accross the site.

[tiwane]

@graysquirrel

If you ID an unknow, and that ID puts it into another category, say “dicots” then that will not count towards the “unknown” leaderboard, because it’s no longer in the “unknown” category. Your number on the “dicot” leaderboard will increase instead.

Yup, @graysquirrel nailed it.

[stevejones]

(Gottta check my messages more often…) Those southern Arizona observations were pretty easy, mostly confirmations and good detail photos. I think it’s just the general increase in users in the state that’s left me behind. Luckily @mjplagens and@sganley (among others) are actively IDing Arizona plants as well.

[clockwood]

I have a saved search for Unknowns that are in NY, aren’t marked reviewed, excluding bacteria and other categories that go into “Unknown” even though they’re not, and sorted by random. This is how I do most of my IDing.

Usually I can only get a very broad category, but sometimes I can do family level or lower. Sometimes I can’t ID the thing but I can stick it in a relevant project (e.g. microscopic microbes). And sometimes I have no idea what I’m looking at, haha.

[karyncook79]

I am by no means an expert, but I’ve gotten pretty good at identifying a few species of plants and insects. I search by my state, which is North Carolina, and sometimes by my region, North Carolina Piedmont, and I do look for the unknowns specifically.