Hi! Is there a way to query the database for a list of observations to find those that were once IDed as a taxon but are now IDed as another taxon? If so, how would I go about doing that?
Thanks!
Hi! Is there a way to query the database for a list of observations to find those that were once IDed as a taxon but are now IDed as another taxon? If so, how would I go about doing that?
Thanks!
Oh! I just wrote that guide! Hold on
Has anyone else noticed that @arboretum_amy is
LIGHTNING FAST
with her forum solutions? I’ll try some of these and see if I can get what I want. Thank you!
Haha I’m lightning fast once in a blue moon and the rest of the time someone else beats me to it!
You might also prefer to look at Explore view rather than Identify. That way if you tab over to the “species” tab it will show you stuff that often gets confused for the species in question. Using my example of Asparagus setaceus, that turns out to look like this: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?ident_taxon_id=75604&photos=true&place_id=any&verifiable=any&view=species&without_taxon_id=75604
Okay, so I want to find a list of observations that were IDed first as any taxon and then the current taxon is a certain one. In other words, “How many of this taxon were IDed wrong to begin with?” If I could hone it down to “How many of this taxon were IDed to a wrong species level or below to begin with?” “How many of this taxon were IDed as this before being IDed as that?” etc. Trying to find common mis-IDs of a taxon.
I tried to find a list of all field names, but didn’t see one in the Help.
I remember this thread which makes a cool graph, but again it’s sort of the reverse of your question, more of a “observations that started as this but ultimately turned out not to be this.”
That could work, too. I’ll take a look. Thanks!
Cool! But it only seems to find those that haven’t been resolved – that are still at a higher taxon because there isn’t consensus with the observer. So it doesn’t seem to be pulling up Research grade observations in that number.
I forgot. :) I’ll have to look at this more tomorrow. Thank you!