Bees and wasps have a high number of global observations, too many for identifiers to fully keep up with. This discussion is for sharing search filter or other technical strategies or tips, current focuses or updates, or other ideas to help organize to ID. Here are some I use:
Explore
Zoom/nagivate through map to find obs. in locations difficult to otherwise search by name in iNat (e.g. Micronesia; some locations are missing)
For locations only Identify has: copy the Identify place ID from the URL and paste into the Explore URL to find it on the map.
Search a location by keyword: click Species: see iNat. records (isnāt a full location checklist)
Click each Species to go to page to view Similar Species and Map
Taxa pages
Check Mapās geographic range, turn on GBIF data filter (top right box on map)
Search literature for locationās species checklists and identification keys
Lists
Combine species in published location checklists with additional found on iNat. to create public iNat. location checklists: use to know spp. options per location
Identify
Restrict location (e.g. Hawaii) and taxon (e.g. bees; Xylocopa)
Use search URLs to save your search filter preferences (see the forum topic by title)
Search all obs. for each genus/species you know sequentially
Take note of groups typically only possible to ID to genus/subgenus (e.g. Dialictus)
Use filter āhighā and ālowā taxon, e.g. to only see obs. with species-IDs
View non-reviewed casual grade and RG obs. (RG are occasionally incorrect)
View every obs. in enlarged-view w/o IDing, then ID all from the grid-view using āAgreeā
Use āAgreeā directly from the grid view for known/easy species (optional, use caution)
For unclear photos, right click āview image in new tabā to magnify larger
Uncheck reviewed box for obs. you want to ID later (if you typically search āunreviewedā)
Take note of genus/subgenus obs. you or others may determine species for later
Review/ID locations or taxonomic groups completely and sequentially (ID characters and spp. options freshest in memory)
Donāt rely on Computer Vision, unless it matches and you check range/spp.
Avoid species IDs unless you know location ID options and how (or if) spp. differ
Add uncertain IDs as comments, or at least comment ID is uncertain
If only IDing either bees or wasps, learn commonly confused taxa (bees, wasps, flies, etc)
Organization/communication
Determine if the community IDing a location agrees with each othersā IDs; discuss if not
Correct/comment on if users are guessing (e.g. all Agapostemon being IDed as A. virescens, out of range IDs)
For newer people like me, focus on a few groups and areas and learn them well. I normally do Arizona-New Mexico and look especially for plants I recognize, like Malvaceae, where thereās a small set of typical insect species.
Couple of things that I do:
=If you have a user who asks questions about how you got an ID, consider running through just their observations, Iāve done this before, and it is appreciated by people.
=If I come across an IDāer who consistently makes bad IDās I run through their IDās https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?ident_user_id= fill in the user name after the = sign.
=If you find a questionable observation well out of the expected range, search for the image on Google Chrome, itās annoying how often Iāve found the questionable picture in a news article or magazine.
=One I need to do more often is to remember to go through all of the pictures in the observation, if an observation gets to research grade then every picture gets shown in the page about that species even if the observation had extra species in other pictures, and can be deceiving when people are looking through those pictures.
Yes, those videos are similar to weekly zoom/video calls and include a live Q&A. If anyone is interested in joining live please see contact instructions here.
Itās true many species are difficult to refine ID for past genus or subgenus. Most typically, many Dialictus for example. Ammophila is difficult. Although in many cases of difficult groups species are still possible to distinguish, with sufficient magnification and photo angles, and identifier knowledge of distinguishing characters. In most difficult examples, high magnification may still allow species IDs (e.g. microscope photos if specimens are collected). Most or all Megachile for example are distinguishable in that way (although they may not be in many ordinary photos).
I think another useful point is where the experts can advise people on what makes good photos for identification, particularly with bees/wasps/ants. For instance clear shots of venation, front of face, tibias, abdominal segments, etc. It can be difficult if the eye is in focus (as is generally the advice for photography) but the wings, antenna and limbs are fuzzyā¦
The more of this is practiced the easier it is to reference previous identifications to compare.
Iāve also found with many of the wasps Iām looking at that filtering only āResearch Gradeā removes all photos due to low IDer count generally! This just makes it more important to ensure those that do make research grade have strong identifying evidence visible or clear descriptions, rather than just because the IDer āknowsā the species :)
Iām a relative noob of a bee IDer, and Iām wondering what I can do to be most helpful. At the moment I mostly ID Apis mellifera, hoping to get those out of the way so that the experts donāt have to deal with as many of them. I do that either by filtering for anything in the US in Apis or by going through bees stuck at Epifamily=Anthophila. While Iām there, I clear away flies and wasps, or do another occasional obvious sorting to family level (like bee with abdominal scopa ā Megachilidae).
But I wonder if thereās something different I could be doing that would be more helpful. Do we have specific goals we want to reach as a community?
Reducing the number of mistake in species-level IDs seems like it would be very valuable so the CV doesnāt get mis-trained; are most errors like that getting caught already or would backup help? There arenāt many bees I could confirm to species level right now, but I could imagine us doing ID parties like the fly people, where people like me get trained on a specific taxon and then we can go in and clean it up.
Iād also just be interested in knowing how some of the experts go about their ID workflow. Do you usually go taxon by taxon, or just tear through the newest crop of āNeeds IDā bees, or go through the RG ones to make sure theyāre right? What are the most common mistakes you see people make that you wish you had help cleaning up?
Starting with Apis mellifera is also helpful, especially since some IDs can be misidentified as it by observers and need correcting. Iād recommend just continuing to ID bees and learning families, genus, subgenus, and maybe more species over time. In the US, species like Apostemon virescens, and (any) Bombus impatiens, B. griseocollis, B. bimaculatus, etc. are often easily be picked out. For Lasioglossum, often the genus or subgenus (e.g. Dialictus) is the most specific ID that can be specified. Learning some wasps at the same time is good too as you say, because some get misidentified as bees. I sometimes use Identify with the āhigh and low taxonā filters, and filter for āBees,ā or sometimes āBees - speciesā which will give only species-level observations.
