Orchid Observers Talk

Identification process

  • Rich_Mielcarek by Rich_Mielcarek

    Can someone please clarify/confirm the process you are using to identify the photographs. You ask photographers to mark a level of certainty for their initial identifications but it seems these are then ignored (in that that are not visible to subsequent assessors). All photographs are then made available for identification by whoever wishes without them having to give any level of certainty on their assessment. Is this correct or have I missed something?

    How are you going to finalise each identification and is there any way the original observer can see the final identification decision?

    Not trying to be contentious, just understand the process.

    Rich Mielcarek

    Posted

  • hotfungus by hotfungus scientist

    Hi Rich, I'm glad you saw my comment under the title 'Dactylorhiza x grandis: Identifications, data and opinions' in 'Science'. Just to elaborate, on the 'final' identifications - as per the Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland's approach to verifications, the final arbiter will be the vice-county recorder or relevant expert in a particular group of plants ('referee' for those of you who are new to all this language) - we won't be 'telling' people what's what. If there are records that we are not sure of and may impact the structure of the data for my research project I'll be contacting the record originator and/or the relevant vc recorder to iron out problems. The 'final' records will be deposited with the BSBI and accessible/correctable via the vice-county recorder or the BSBI data managers (In the same way that deposited records are already treated). Cheers, Mark

    Posted

  • Rich_Mielcarek by Rich_Mielcarek

    hi Mark

    thanks for the further clarification.

    Can you explain why you are asking other observers for their opinion on the identification of the plants in the photographs - what are you using that extra data set for?

    Rich M

    Posted

  • kathcas79 by kathcas79 scientist

    Hi Rich – The originator’s field record and associated image(s) are stored as the primary record. Orchid Observers is a citizen science project, and we are inviting everyone to identify each orchid image uploaded by our many participants. While many photographs are uploaded by contributors with a degree of certainty as to the species (‘certain’ or ‘likely’ options on the upload form) others are more difficult to identify, especially if not in flower, and may need further identification. Each photograph is then viewed multiple times by our participating botanical community and our citizen scientists who make determinations from which a consensus ID can be made. Particularly tricky ones may be further verified by experts. We are really pleased with the high quality of species ID‘s received thus far – keep up the good work! Hope this answers your question Rich?

    Posted

  • Rich_Mielcarek by Rich_Mielcarek

    How does a consensus ID work then? Some plants probably aren't specifically identifiable from photos.

    I'd assumed that as the identification process is so weighted against the identifier, this must be another citizen science project.

    About 80% of the current photos are straightforward to identify but if you really want people to try and accurately identify the rest you really need to allow access to the photographers identification (which will have been based upon so much more information than is available in the photo), their expressed confidence in the identification and the date the photo was taken (especially if you are going to include previous years photos). It would also help to give us the option of skipping those where we have no idea!

    You've mentioned how it is hard to identify plants that aren't in flower and Mark has touched elsewhere on how hybrids are a problem with the dacts. We haven't started on the Butterflys (OK if you can see the pollinia) and then there's the nightmare of the Fragrants. Luckily you aren't looking for photos of Epipactis!

    Rich M

    Posted

  • hotfungus by hotfungus scientist in response to Rich Mielcarek's comment.

    Hi Rich, The original observations of the recorder are certainly not ignored, they are maintained within the data system and will be distributed to the BSBI etc. Unfortunately there are some limitations with what can be displayed on the current platform and we have not been able to present all of the information that the natural history community would ordinarily find essential for identification purposes (we are noting issues such as this down for resolution at a later date). On average each image will be seen by 20 people and a consensus ID derived from their observations - these data are being collected by my citizen science colleagues for their own research. Where the original ID and the consensus ID are in conflict the record will be checked by museum colleagues with significant expertise in orchid ID and passed onto the relevant vc recorder/referee for verification. I hope that helps, regards, Mark

    Posted