Question regarding Research Grade status at the genus level

[milamb]

Hello everyone,

Recently, I noticed that some observations identified only to the genus level are marked as Research Grade, while others are marked as Needs ID.

I have read the documentation, but I could not find a clear explanation for why this happens.

Could someone please explain:

• Why do some genus-level observations reach Research Grade while others do not?

• Is there a way to filter or distinguish between them?

For example, when searching for the genera Egira or Chlorissa, how can I find only the observations that are still Needs ID, since some records may require further identification in the future but have already reached Research Grade?

Thank you very much for your help.

Please see the following examples:

1. 2. Genus Egira

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/281463104

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/280733600

2. Genus Chlorissa

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/280183427

3. Genus Oliga

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/289357328

[jgw_atx]

Someone has marked the observation “as good as it can be”

This results in RG status at Genus level. This is usually done by IDers when there are multiple possible species and the photo(s) don’t provide enough detail to distinguish between similar species. Very common with arthropods, fungi, and other cryptic groups. This is done manually, on a case-by-case basis, which is why only some observations look like this.

[dlevitis]

This link gives members of Genus Oliga that are “Needs ID”

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?verifiable=true&taxon_id=133344&lrank=genus&place_id=any

And this one https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=research&verifiable=true&taxon_id=133344&lrank=genus&place_id=any

gives things that are considered Research Grade (for the reason @jgw_atx gave) that are IDed only to genus and no further. The filters for the second search look like this:

[milamb]

@jgw_atx thank you for clarifying, that makes much more sense now!

@dlevitis I also appreciate your explanation about filters — very helpful!