Do Your Observations Need to be Identified?
On BowerBird many observations remained unidentified, partly because the "Needs ID" search only finds observations without any ID, rather than just missing a genus level ID. These records do not serve much purpose until they are at least identified to some level. Having something there also allows specialists in a field to find your observation so increases the likelihood of further refinement (most people can't look at every observation). It also eliminates some ambiguity if there are several objects in an image (an insect on a flower, for example) for what you want identified.
- To find any of your own records that don't have any identification:
- Click on Identify from the menu at the top.
- Click on the Filters option on the search line.
- Tick the Your Observations box.
- Select the Unknown category.
- Click on Update Search.
Clicking on an observation will open an identification window for you.
Additionally, in the Filters if you expand More Filters and in the Project input box type and then select bowerbird (be sure to not have Your Observations selected) you can help identify observations from other members of the BowerBird community here.
Comments
I had around 200 without any ID so am slowly picking through these...
For a while I kept up and reviewed all observations for Australia that needed identification but now don't have so much time for that but often run a filter for Odonata, a group I can help with. That's why it is important to put in some ID.
Only have two records "unidentified" going through the filter as you suggest. I do however have a lot that I have identified to Order/family etc that still need ID to at least genus. Seems we have lost some identifiers/entomologists since shifting from BowerBird? Maybe gained some more international identifiers? but not being an expert or much good at identifying some critters, still would like more of my records identified.
There are a lot of international identifiers here but most will only be able to identify some of ours to family. Ken was good in that he used to proactively ask specialists throught his museum contacts to help out. Things may improve now that there is an Australian iNat (via ALA).
Thanks, don't even see Ken identifying as many sp. as previously? so hoping with the advent of ALA node things will improve.
Add a Comment