I think iNat is expecting ‘snapshots’ - literally - and isn’t set up nor interested in processes. The solution I use is to place links to previous obs of the same thing, like
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/309857829
But I think a single obs with a series of pics with dates, or times, and explanatory notes would be better.
But that describes, literally, a series of multiple observations, not a single observation. Otherwise, where does a “single” observation even begin or end?
Have you tried this?
Yes, a research scientist would so define it. If I take a series of pH measurements at one water sampling site at different times, or a series of DBH measurements of one tree at different times, or a series of percent cover measurements of one transect at different times, each measurement is considered a separate observation.
Plant annotations are pretty terrible on iNat. The annotations don’t apply to whole swathes of plants, so cannot be added accurately anyway.
It’s vastly more useful to have a single observation of a single specimen that records all the details about it.
Yes that’s what I said.
“I think iNat is expecting ‘snapshots’ - literally - and isn’t set up nor interested in processes.”
I know it would cause huge layers of complexity to change iNat, but as an ecologist, not a taxonomist, processes and interactions are where it’s at. IDing individuals is just a necessary starting point, like learning to read.
but each single measurement is only a single data point, without context. Only when placed in a table, or otherwise correlated, do they become information.
Yeah, gotta be on my to-do list, somewhere in the top half.
That’s the quest of the researcher, not the concern of the observer. The observer records the data from the individual interaction.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.