The 2024 New England - and New York! - Plant ID-a-thon
Welcome, everyone, to the third annual 48-hour plant identification marathon! The first two years we concentrated on New England; this year, by request, we are adding New York State, just in case you've run out of plants to ID in New England (that was my feeble attempt at sarcasm, by the way). This year the ID-a-thon runs from 7 PM Eastern Time on Friday, Feb. 23rd, to 7 PM on Sunday, Feb. 25th. I'm sure you'll all be thoroughly sick of winter by then - I already am - so spending a weekend looking at photos of unfrozen plants may be just the boost you need to carry you through till spring.
Please join the project by clicking the Join button in the upper right-hand corner of the project home page here: https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/2024-new-england-and-new-york-plants-id-a-thon-feb-23-25 If you join the project, you'll get these journal posts delivered to your dashboard. I'll make another post a few days before the event just as a reminder and then multiple posts throughout the weekend to help spur you to what I hope will be extraordinary IDing efforts.
Please feel free to ask questions at any point, especially if you're new to this event or to making identifications on iNaturalist. The easiest way to ask a question is by making a comment on this journal post, but you can also send me a private message. If you are new, you might find it helpful to read these journal posts: Why Should You Make IDs? - https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/new-england-plants-id-a-thon-feb-25-27-2022/journal/61755-why-should-you-make-ids and How I Make Identifications - https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/new-england-plants-id-a-thon-feb-25-27-2022/journal/61944-how-i-make-identifications
Here, I'm going to invite many active plant observers and identifiers to join this project, but everyone is invited to join! There will be another such mention in a post a few days before the event, because a number of people have said they would find that reminder helpful. And while I have your attention, let me just say thank you! - for making so many plant observations in New England and New York and, especially, for IDing so many observations for other observers.
@acknaturenerd, @adamkohl, @agave6_tomwalker, @akilee, @albach, @alex_abair, @alex_iosipenko, @allisonbf, @amandammvt, @anaturalfocus, @animalview29, @annschunior, @apgarm, @arethusa, @astrobirder, @azik, @bellakat224, @beniiiii, @berkshirenaturalist, @bethstandard, @bgaudubon, @billmac, @birderboy2015, @birders130, @birdleaves, @bkatzenberg, @bmvig, @bpagnier, @brothernorbert, @bryanconnolly, @bryanpfeiffer, @btk, @bugman1388, @carl291, @cbarron, @cbuelow45, @ceaustin, @ceiseman, @cesarcastillo, @cgbb2004, @charlie, @choess, @cobrien207, @conboy, @crx2aj3, @cschorn, @csledge, @curiousbynature, @cypselurus, @danbotany87, @danielatha, @danlharp, @davidenrique, @dawnvla, @ddubois2, @deb59, @deparia1950, @djolles, @djringer, @dogwoodvalley, @donlubin, @dorothy, @doug_mcgrady, @dysm, @edgarallenhoopoe, @edropkin, @elacroix-carignan, @elaphrornis, @elizajsyh, @ellenjones6, @ellsp, @er1kksen, @er-birds, @ericpo1, @erikamitchell, @frousseu, @garymitchell, @goosiaczek, @gpalermo, @grantfessler, @grazing, @gtasaints, @guidobrusa, @hallm, @hcoste, @hollyyoung, @human_landfill, @hydrophilus, @ian_medeiros, @igor_kuzmin, @irag, @jackcadwell, @jacksonfrost, @jasondombroskie, @jef, @jformanorth, @jholmes, @jimbo225, @jljones, @joedziewa, @josh_rudder, @jsolfrian, @judyasarkof, @julie_richburg1, @karenlombard, @karolina, @karro_frost, @katamamurray, @kcbowmanphd, @kebsearcy, @kellyfuerstenberg, @klodonnell, @kpmcfarland, @larixlaricina, @larry216, @lmtaylor, @lovescinow, @lpagano, @lythronax246, @mamiles, @margaretcurtin, @marvelliott, @maryah, @matthias55, @mattstanton, @mcharpentier, @mickicolbeck, @mikeakresh, @mjpapay, @mnerrie, @mohale, @moxiel, @mradik, @mtjones, @mugglelissa, @natemarchessault, @nebotany, @nick2524, @nmes, @nonenmac, @nsharp, @ntepper, @nycnatureobserver, @origamilevi, @patswain, @peakaytea, @petersmj, @plbuttercup, @plnthunter22, @polemoniaceae, @polypody, @quietlymagical, @radbackedsalamander, @rcurran, @rdstevenson, @rherold, @rinaturalist, @russ_cohen, @rynxs, @sadawolk, @sally_jacobson, @sengelbo, @shaunmichael, @slamonde, @smpierce, @smrozak, @someplant, @splnddfairywren, @spochron, @spritelink, @srall, @stephanieradner, @stevendaniel, @susanelliott, @susanhewitt, @tarpinian, @thomashulsey, @threepogonias, @tmurray74, @tomaszavada, @trscavo, @tsn, @vicki_l, @vickidoo, @wanderingeden, @wayne_fidler, @wdvanhem, @wefwef, @wernerehl, @williambee, @wnyjw, @wojciech, @wsweet321, @xris, @yayemaster, @zihaowang, @zitserm
Kommentit
awesome!
Exciting!
Thanks for organizing this!
Cool, thanks! Last summer/fall I led an effort to get central NY plants with high level IDs down to at least family level; a few remained mysterious so I may add them to this project.
Sounds fun and helpful - thanks so much for organizing it!
This may be an appropriate place to mention the observation fields that I've been using as tags for difficult-to-identify plants. If a photo shows mostly bark, for example, not many people will have the expertise to recognize it. Feel free to use these fields as tags yourself! Here are the lists (search the field without a value unless a value is specified below):
• bark [field: Tree bark]
• winter buds [field: Buds or twigs]
• seedlings [field: Seedling? value: Yes]
• fruits, seeds, cones [field: Fruit or seeds]
• dry plant remnants [field: Plant remnants]
• roots (a long shot, but...) [field: Roots]
• aquatic plants (probably includes some non-plant algae) [field: Habitat, value: Aquatic]
Any of you have fields or projects that are good sources of identification mysteries?
@lmtaylor, please feel free to add "mystery" observations to this project! I plan to do some of that myself, if I have time. And that's fantastic you use observation fields to help identifiers find observations for their particular area of expertise - I would never have thought of that!
Thanks Lynn, looking forward to it.
@mollyopsis !
I'm not sure how much I can help beyond the handful of plants I already ID, but I'll try!
I'm happy to take a look and see if I can help ID anything. In the meantime, though, I've posted many plant observations to iNaturalist that are still in the "needs ID" category, so would be most grateful if any of you would be willing to look at my observations (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=any&user_id=russ_cohen&verifiable=any) and enlighten me with the identity of what I have seen. I promise you that most of the photos I've posted there are in focus + show enough of the plant that a knowledgeable person should be able to ID them.
Are we going to be identifying observations only made by people in this group, or by anyone? and how do we use the tags to search for observations we want to identify?
@mohale, we're going to be identifying any plant observation in New England or New York that is still at Needs ID, so not just observations by members of this project. I don't use tags to find observations, but I use the filters all the time. Read through what I wrote here and see if that helps: https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/new-england-plants-id-a-thon-feb-25-27-2022/journal/61944-how-i-make-identifications . I think the easiest thing to do is to filter for a particular species or genus. If you have more questions, please ask, but I'll write another journal post closer to the event in which I give more hints and links to help identifiers find observations that are relatively easy to identify.
@lynnharper do we need to manually add every observation we identify to the project? Thanks!
As to the question about tags: for ordinary tags, go to the filters menu and enter a search term in the "Description/Tags" box at upper left.
If you're referring to my comment about using observation fields as "tags", really they are filters to sort out observations with particular properties, such as having photos of winter twigs. If you're fond of identifying twigs, for example, here's how to use a field as a filter. Add the following to your search URL: &field:FIELDNAME=VALUE, the value being optional in which case it'll pull up all observations with that field. So, for twigs, add &field:buds+or+twigs=
Hope that's what you wanted to know!
Oh yeah, you can filter out fields too, the syntax being &without_field=FIELDNAME
@trscavo, no, you do not need to add observations you've identified. I'll make note of how many plant Needs ID observations there are right at the start and then again at the end, plus figure out how many plant observations were added over the weekend. Those numbers should give us a pretty good idea of how many observations became Research Grade or Casual over the 48 hours. In addition, I'll note those same measures for the weekend BEFORE the marathon, which will give us a rough baseline for comparison. You can read through the journal posts for the last couple of years if you've interested in the fine details. In addition, this year I'm hoping to use a tool that @arboretum_amy pointed me to, which will allow me to tell each project member exactly how many IDs they contributed. But I haven't had a chance to try that out yet, so I'm not promising I can do that!
@lmtaylor, thanks for your explanation of how to use tags! There are so many different ways of whittling down the enormous pile of Needs ID observations to something more manageable and I don't remember to think of them all, so it's great you've added this additional method.
dang it why am I just finding me about this now
Because I just posted about it for the first time yesterday, @jformanorth? Well, this year's event, at any rate. If you didn't hear about the ID blitzes the last two years, my apologies! But I didn't want to tag every single person who follows me or whom I follow, because I don't want to impose too much. (But I'll impose a little....)
Any reason for the dates for this blitz?
@jef, I figured February is a pretty quiet month for botanists, so people are more likely to be inside rather than out walking. I like to give everyone a month's notice and by the time I got myself organized, the weekend of the 23rd through 25th was a month away. That's about the time we did this last year. I'm sorry if it's not convenient for you!
Not inconvenient, just a tricky time to do plant identifications! I'm still shaken by the CNC happening in April.
@jef, at least when you're doing IDs, you can filter for June or July and get photos of green plants, not frozen brown stalks covered in snow! As for the CNC in April, I console myself with the thought that I really want to get outside by then and the CNC is a good excuse to ignore everything else for four days and go see what's coming up.
@lynnharper I would love to participate every year but am more likely to do so with advanced notice 😀. If you ever create a mailing list, o6ut me on it!
@jformanorth, the best I can do is to inform the New England Botanical Society and the New York Flora Association in time for them to get the word out to their members. I'll make a note to do that earlier next year.
@lynnharper Do you post notice on plant-focused social media groups too?
@lmtaylor, I don't - iNat is practically the only "social media" I partake of. But feel free to post something wherever you'd like! And thanks!
@lynnharper I need to work on my reading comprehension, I misunderstood the project--you want us to identify existing observations, not make new ones. Happy to try to help, although the vast majority of my plant IDs are adding "angiosperm" to observations with no ID at all, in order to bring them to the attention of better plant ID people :)
@jef Not to speak for Lynn, but it's my opinion that you'd be contributing a LOT by going through the huge numbers of observations that are identified as only Plantae or Magnoliophyta and adding a genus- or family-level ID to the obvious ones ("Knapweed" "Mustard Family" etc. etc.)
@jef, I'm glad I'm not the only one who mis-reads directions! And I add an awful lot of Dicot IDs to Unknown observations, so I know how you feel.
@lmtaylor, you're taking the words right out of my mouth - which is good!
Oh, FEBRUARY, I thought it was January LOL. Count me in!
I agree with the approach of only identifying as best you can from your own knowledge, e.g. to Family level. It's important to not over-identify something, especially not to rubberstamp an ID by an expert, or someone else you consider more knowledgable than yourself in a Taxon group. That can make it harder for Taxon specialists to find Observations needing ID.
I have learned so much from Identifiers, especially Taxon specialists, on iNaturalist! I used to get frustrated that many of my insect observations weren't getting to species level. That was, until I learned how complex the taxonomy can be, and how subtle the characters for identification can be, e.g. wing venation, tarsi color.
I've improved my observations by shooting multiple angles, learning which features are needed for different taxa, and improving my macro capabilities. Still, many cannot be identified or distinguished from photographs alone. Many bees, for example, can't be distinguished without examing the genitalia under a microscope. I'm just not going to do that!
All of this applies to plants, as well. Botanists use 10X and 20X hand lenses in the field for good reason! It can be possible to get good macro shots of key features in the field, e.g.: the length and shape of hairs on sepals. So I try to get the best shots I can, as many as I can.
@xris, I am right there with you on bee genitalia! Ditto some moths, and I bet a lot of beetles need microscopic examination, too.
And you make some very good points about not over-identifying. When we get closer to the ID marathon, I'll write a journal post about some of the details of how an observation can make it to Research Grade or Casual status, which will reinforce the points you're making here. As great as iNat is in many ways, for some taxa it can't substitute for in-hand examination.
@lynnharper I am always hesitant to mark an observation as "can't be improved" because I'm like, well maybe someone else can see a distinction here that I can't? I would love to hear your thoughts on it and look forward to your post.
I don't think I've ever marked an Observation as "it's as good as it can be". I don't see it used much even by taxonomic experts.
I use it for really, really bad photos ... But there are plenty of borderline bad photos where I don't think the plant is recognizable but maybe it is.
If an observation contains multiple photos and multiple species, I might mark "it's as good as it can be", especially if the observation is old enough to suggest the observer is not going to split it.
There are some prolific identifiers who use "good as it can be" fairly often, and in my view to excess. Then again, I think it's a site function that could just as well be done away with entirely. It's either ID'd to species, or it "needs ID," whether it will ever get one or not.
This discussion of As Good As Can Be is making me think, which is a good thing. I tend to be the sort of person who starts at the beginning and works towards the end, finishing everything along the way. For iNat, that translates to my doing a LOT of initial IDs on Unknowns. I use As Good As Can Be on my own observations which I doubt can ever be identified to the species level. I also use it on multi-species observations or other problematic observations. Occasionally, I'll use it on observations where there's good evidence to ID it to genus, but not enough to bring it down to species level (for example, yellow Oxalis with no photos of flowers or fruit).
But you all are making me think: What if, instead of focusing on starting at the beginning (Unknowns), I focused on producing more "end products," so to speak. That could mean I work on improving my ID skills so I could bring more observations to Research Grade at the species level, for example. Or making more comments on observations, pointing out the characters needed for future observations to make it to RG at the species level. I'd be helping to produce more good data and more good naturalists, both valuable end products in my world.
I'd be curious to hear more about everyone's methods and philosophy of making IDs.
@lynnharper as always let me know if you have questions about that link I provided. Thank you for running this project--"third annual" sounds so official!
Lisää kommentti