[Taxacom] Citizen Science
John Grehan
calabar.john at gmail.com
Fri Oct 24 08:33:03 CDT 2014
2014
And the problem of geographic bias is not confined to 'citizen science'.
Years ago I was made aware of research collection records that had some
very intriguing distribution patterns - intriguing until one realized that
they often tracked where the roads were or places that had road access.
Perhaps the only rephrasing of the section quoted that I would have
suggested would be that the problems apply to any approach that lacks
appropriate protocols (whether a citizen scientist or any other type of
scientist [presumably a scientist who is not a citizen?]). But it always
easier to identify the limits of language after the fact.
John Grehan
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, JF Mate <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com> wrote:
> Continuing Stephen and thread on Darren Ward and Citizen Science. I
> am attaching an excerpt of his abstract:
>
> Darren Ward (excerpt from abstract of the article):
>
> “Over the course of 1 year 25 members contributed 360 records from 186
> taxa, including the discovery of several introduced species new to New
> Zealand. There was a strong geographical bias to the records, with the
> majority being based around the major cities. Aculeates (stinging
> wasps) were signi�cantly over-represented in the NatureWatch records.
> Only half (55 %) of taxa were identi�ed to species level, with a
> further 28 % at genus level, and 17 % identi�ed above genus level
> (family, order). Furthermore, the majority (65 %) of taxa were
> recorded only once, and only a few taxa were recorded [5 times (top
> records were ‘‘Ichneumonidae’’, ‘‘Hymenoptera’’, Anthidium manicatum,
> and Apis mellifera). It is probable that these same biases also exist
> for many other taxonomic groups in projects operated by citizen
> scientists lacking set protocols. Caution should be exercised on the
> subsequent use, compilation, and analysis of citizen science,
> especially without prior examination of records and potential biases.�
>
>
> (Stephen´s opinion crudely cut and pasted here) “I interpret this to
> have been a deliberate attempt to reinforce to the professional
> community the (false) idea that such "citizen science" projects aren't
> worth bothering with.�
>
>
> Seriously, what is the problem with what Mr Ward is saying? If you
> check any of the sites mentioned in Taxacom you will discover that
> what he is saying is true! This is not a criticism of nature lovers,
> it is a human condition: we love butterflies and colourful things and
> dislike small creepy-crawlies. Why would you expect different from the
> subset of nature macrophotographers?
>
> Jason
>
>
>
> On 24 October 2014 09:17, Alastair Culham <a.culham at reading.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> > For the past year we've been running a citizen science project to survey
> powdery mildew species around the UK in a joint project with the Royal
> Horticultural Society -
> http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/crg/powdery-mildew-survey/
> >
> > This has resulted in a data set of around 200 samples in the trial year
> including 59 different PM species
> http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/whiteknightsbiodiversity/campus-species-lists/fungi/powdery-mildew-2014/.
> We are hoping for over 1000 samples next season.
> >
> > Samples are identified using a combination of morphological and
> molecular techniques by a research council funded PhD student and the
> results are emailed back to the sample providers as well as posted on our
> blogs. Engaging the UK public in this scheme has allowed a more widespread
> sampling and allows the student doing the work to focus on lab work rather
> than chasing around the UK for samples.
> >
> > The challenge has been to keep the survey in people's minds so that we
> get samples sent on a regular basis throughout the long mildew season.
> This is a non-trivial job and requires a lot of forward planning.
> >
> > Ours is a small CS scheme compared with large scale monitoring of the UK
> flora by the BSBI which has a network of local (usually highly expert)
> regional recorders and a further network of taxonomic experts to back them
> up. The common feature of effective CS schemes is that there is an ongoing
> investment in management of them and close monitoring of data quality.
> >
> > CS can be highly effective and can be a very cost effective way of
> gathering data if the scheme is run well. All science risks a rubbish in,
> rubbish out scenario and CS is just as sensitive to this as any other
> science is.
> >
> > Alastair
> > ____________________________________________
> >
> > Dr Alastair Culham
> > Centre for Plant Diversity and Systematics
> > Harborne Building, School of Biological Sciences
> > University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AS
> > U.K.
> >
> > Associate Professor of Botany
> > Curator, Reading University Herbarium (RNG)
> > ____________________________________________
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Taxacom [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] on behalf of Stephen
> Thorpe [stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
> > Sent: 23 October 2014 21:35
> > To: KenWalker; John Grehan
> > Cc: Taxacom
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] De-extinction & Rhachistia aldabrae
> >
> > Ken may be a little bit oversensitive, given that he probably has to
> constantly battle the indifference to (and sometimes obstruction of)
> citizen science, by entomologist colleagues. In my view, biodiversity
> recording sites like Project Noah, iSpot, iNaturalist, BowerBird,
> NatureWatch NZ, etc. are not actually all that useful *as initially
> conceived* (photos in the field of live organisms), but can evolve into
> something far more useful. I agree that there is not much point in
> thousands of records of monarch butterflies, and no little brown micro
> moths. For some idea of my vision for these biodiversity recording sites, I
> invite you to browse my own 2489 contributions to NatureWatch NZ, here:
> http://naturewatch.org.nz/observations/stho002
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Fri, 24/10/14, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] De-extinction & Rhachistia aldabrae
> > To: "Walker, Ken" <kwalker at museum.vic.gov.au>
> > Cc: "Taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> > Received: Friday, 24 October, 2014, 2:51 AM
> >
> > Ken,
> >
> > Admittedly I only read postings in a fragmentary way and I
> > know I sometimes
> > miss items, but I am confused by your reference to Jason
> > Mate saying the
> > the efforts of citizen science can be dismissed as " are
> > taking pictures of
> > "bugs": bigger, smaller, red, blue or yellow." What I read
> > was that he said
> > that "The decline in "natural history" amateurs is global
> > and cannot be
> > compensated by the explosion of macrophotography since they
> > (mostly) are
> > taking pictures of "bugs": bigger, smaller, red, blue or
> > yellow." This made
> > no reference to 'citizen science' and I did not see any
> > implication of
> > such. It was only a criticism of a particular mode of
> > information gathering
> > or sharing. I would be grateful therefore for how you made
> > that link the
> > way you did.
> >
> > John Grehan
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Walker, Ken <kwalker at museum.vic.gov.au
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Jason,
> > >
> > > I totally disagree with your assessment of citizen
> > science being on the
> > > decline and that the efforts of citizen science can be
> > dismissed as " are
> > > taking pictures of "bugs": bigger, smaller, red, blue
> > or yellow."
> > >
> > > Here is Australia, we have a citizen science website
> > called BowerBird
> > > which is a socially interactive website somewhat like
> > the northern
> > > hemisphere equivalents of Project Noah, iNaturalist and
> > iSpot. For me, the
> > > quality of a citizen science website is whether or not
> > the data it
> > > generates is on-shared with national or international
> > biodiversity
> > > databases.
> > >
> > > Let me give you one BowerBird example that came in this
> > month. A citizen
> > > science person submitted an image of a
> > ladybeetle. He had tried to
> > > identify it himself but could not place the
> > species. In Australia, we have
> > > a wonderful CSIRO website displaying all known extant
> > Australian ladybeetle
> > > species. The BowerBird image did not match any of
> > the images on the
> > > diagnostic website. So, we sent the image to the
> > BMNH ladybeetle expert
> > > who came back with the statement "Back from the
> > Dead". The species
> > > photographed was presumed to be extinct as it had not
> > been seen or recorded
> > > since 1940. The story of this citizen science
> > find was told in one of our
> > > national newspapers:
> > >
> http://www.theage.com.au/technology/sci-tech/extinct-ladybird-back-from-the-dead-20141014-115u4j.html
> > > (where you can see an image of the beetle).
> > >
> > > To me, the essence of science is to observe and ask
> > questions. What
> > > better way is there than to have thousands of "natural
> > history amateur
> > > eyes" documenting spatial and temporal data for the
> > Australian (swap
> > > Australia for any other country) biota. BowerBird
> > has discovered new
> > > species and helped to track invasive species. The
> > exotic carder bee
> > > (Afranthidium (Immanthidium) repetitum) was first
> > reported in Brisbane in
> > > 2000. By 2007, it had been recorded south
> > in Sydney but since the Sydney
> > > records no further distribution extensions had been
> > recorded. Then in
> > > February and March 2014, two amateurs noticed a
> > "strange bee" in their
> > > garden. They photographed their strange bee and
> > posted the images on
> > > BowerBird with the question "Bee ID?". We bee
> > "experts" immediately
> > > recognised it as the South African carder bee and the
> > records came from
> > > hundreds of kilometres north of Brisbane and hundreds
> > south of Sydney - on
> > > the state of Victoria's border. Australia has
> > many exotic "sleeper weeds"
> > > but they remain in small numbers as they lack their
> > effective pollinator.
> > > The spread of any exotic pollinator needs to be
> > monitored and watched for a
> > > possible explosion of a sleeper weed. It was citizen
> > science who alerted us
> > > to this alarming spread.
> > >
> > > BowerBird "favourites" are often created by an "expert"
> > mentoring "natural
> > > history amateur eyes" . One such case is the
> > humble but extraordinary life
> > > styled and bizarrely coloured flatworms.
> > Australia has only one flatworm
> > > expert located in north Queensland. However, he
> > has inspired many
> > > BowerBird members from around Australia to roll back
> > logs in search of
> > > these flatworms. The expert identifies each
> > flatworm image posted to
> > > BowerBird but he adds stories about how the scientific
> > name was derived and
> > > about the species behaviour. There are now almost
> > 50 BowerBird members on
> > > the Flatworm project who have image captured many of
> > Australia's flatworm
> > > species. The expert has told me that for many
> > species, the BowerBird
> > > images were his first live images for many species - he
> > usually sees them
> > > as pickled individuals. The expert has also
> > requested and been able to get
> > > these amateurs to collect and send him specimens for
> > DNA analysis. If you
> > > have never seen a flatworm or want to read something
> > about them, then I
> > > recommend the flatworm project:
> > > http://www.bowerbird.org.au/projects/1633/sightings
> > >
> > > Finally, the Australian GBIF node is ALA (Atlas of
> > Living Australia).
> > > BowerBird went live in May 2013 and there are automatic
> > weekly data
> > > (images. Identifications, spatrila/temporal etc)
> > uploads to ALA.
> > > Currently, there are almost 11,000 BowerBird records on
> > ALA (to see the
> > > spread of records from around Australia see:
> > >
> http://biocache.ala.org.au/occurrences/search?qÚta_resource_uid:dr893#tab_mapView
> > > ). This represents about a 60% identification
> > success rate for images that
> > > you describe as "pictures of "bugs": bigger, smaller,
> > red, blue or yellow."
> > >
> > > New species have been nominated, new distributions have
> > been recorded, new
> > > stories have been told about the Australian fauna, new
> > friendships have
> > > been made and these new "friends" now go out together
> > on their own
> > > photographic BioBlitzes and on-share their finds to
> > BowerBird to ALA to
> > > GBIF. I'm happy with this deal !!
> > >
> > > I am sure these stories here can be repeated for
> > Project Noah, iNaturalist
> > > and iSpot.
> > >
> > > For me, citizen science is on the up not the
> > decline. Getting
> > > "professional" scientists to engage with this "new"
> > data source is the next
> > > "challenge".
> > >
> > > Best Ken
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
> > On Behalf Of JF
> > > Mate
> > > Sent: Thursday, 23 October 2014 2:14 AM
> > > To: Taxacom
> > > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] De-extinction & Rhachistia
> > aldabrae
> > >
> > > Hi Bob,
> > >
> > > I agree the scale is altogether different but even in
> > densely populated
> > > areas in Australia even basic invertebrate biodiversity
> > knowledge is
> > > lacking. The decline in "natural history" amateurs is
> > global and cannot be
> > > compensated by the explosion of macrophotography since
> > they (mostly) are
> > > taking pictures of "bugs": bigger, smaller, red, blue
> > or yellow. If you
> > > don´t know what you are photographing then it is like
> > it doesn´t exist. For
> > > Europe (with some exceptions) the decline may not be as
> > damaging. The fauna
> > > is well known and there are plenty of guides and keys
> > that digital
> > > enthusiasts could use. The goal here has at least been
> > partially achieved.
> > > In Australia, other than butterflies and a couple of
> > other popular groups
> > > you are out of luck.
> > >
> > > Cristian. Spain is in a similar (albeit not as extreme)
> > situation to
> > > Australia. High biodiversity, incomplete knowledge but
> > a declining body of
> > > amateurs (and legislation that doesn´t help either).
> > >
> > > Best
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This e-mail is solely for the named addressee and may
> > be confidential. You
> > > should only read, disclose, transmit, copy, distribute,
> > act in reliance on
> > > or commercialise the contents if you are authorised to
> > do so. If you are
> > > not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please
> > notify mailto:
> > > postmaster at museum.vic.gov.au
> > by email immediately, or notify the sender
> > > and then destroy any copy of this message. Views
> > expressed in this email
> > > are those of the individual sender, except where
> > specifically stated to be
> > > those of an officer of Museum Victoria. Museum Victoria
> > does not represent,
> > > warrant or guarantee that the integrity of this
> > communication has been
> > > maintained nor that it is free from errors, virus or
> > interference.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Taxacom Mailing List
> > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> > > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> > >
> > > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list