1,000,000 iNat observations from Ukraine: summary and some stats

On 16.09.2023 we reached 1,000,000 iNat observations from Ukraine (including “casuals”), so I think it’s worth to highlight it and to make a small summary.

За цим лінком автоматичний куций гугл переклад даної сторінки українською.

Official celebrations of the round numbers by the iNat team only consider non-"casual" observations. However, within our Ukrainian segment, among the top 10 most active users, there are 3 botanists from our central botanical garden, who have accumulated a lot of nice observations on the distribution of cultivated plants. So most of our “casual” observations are rather valuable. And it’s just interesting to analyse it with “casuals”.

The observation numbered 1,000,000 was some of a large series upload by @alexander_baransky, perhaps this one (although its position will change after some observations will be deleted).

Among the 1,000,000 observations 944,192, 94%, are non-“casual” (comparing to 90% worldwide on iNat). Among “casual” observations 48,091 (5% from all) are marked as captive/cultivated. 681,173 observations, 68%, are “research grade” (62% worldwide, 67% Europe). 803,299 observations among non-“casuals”, 80% from all, are on the level of species or better (77% worldwide, 81% Europe).

Ukraine ranks approximately 21st globally among all countries on iNat by the number of observations (0.6% from all iNat observations). For comparison the top countries are US (78 millions), Canada (12M), Mexico (6M) and Australia (6M); in Europe (33M) – UK (4M), France (3M), Germany (3M), Spain (2M) and Italy (2M).

Our one million observations were made by 10,304 users (0.3% from all observers on iNat), among them only 8,451 uploaded any non-“casual” observations. It’s 97 observations per observer in average (49 worldwide, 47 Europe). The most observations were uploaded by @alexander_baransky, 56,797 (5.7% from all Ukrainian observations). 33% observations were uploaded by top 10 users (by number of observations). 17 users uploaded over 10,000 observations from Ukraine, 115 – over 1,000 (including “casuals”). Over the last few months, around 1,200 observations from Ukraine have been uploaded daily by about 100 users.

In Ukraine only about 1 in 4,000 people have ever used iNat (c. 0.025% of the population), whereas in the US it’s about 1 in 200 (c. 0.5% of the population), so we clearly have some potential for growth.

By the current identifications the 1,000,000 observations from Ukraine represent 18,379 species (including many cultivated/captive). Non-“casual” observations represent 15,683 species, “research grade” – 11,487 species. “Cultivated/captive” observations alone represent 4,502 species (numbers will change with future IDs).

Considering that around 60,000 eukaryotic species are estimated to naturally inhabit Ukraine, our iNaturalist data covers more than a quarter (c. 26%) of these species. I think this is pretty solid considering that many species require microscopic or anatomical analysis for identification.

Two users observed over 4,000 species (including many cultivated/captive) in the first 1,000,000 observations from Ukraine, 4 users – over 3,000 species, 15 users – over 2,000 species and 47 users – over 1,000 species (with species-level identification or better).

Top 10 users by the number of species observed in the first 1,000,000 observations from Ukraine (with ID at species level or better), including “casuals”, with other stats (some numbers will change because of the future IDs and deleted observations).

No Observer Species - all Species - non-casual Species - RG Species - captive Observations (all) IDs
1 @oleksandr_shynder 4,386 2,989 2,449 2,045 23,541 4,739
2 @igor117 4,303 3,553 2,470 827 24,841 10,815
3 @yuri_bengus 3,619 2,977 2,456 787 10,110 127
4 @aleksandr_levon 3,137 2,427 2,203 955 27,747 641
5 @vasyliuk1 2,935 2,895 2,349 56 21,968 1,252
6 @davydovbotany 2,899 2,885 2,675 22 24,326 172,292
7 @liubov_ilminska 2,756 2,734 2,151 22 7,892 159
8 @svetlana-bogdanovich 2,716 2,672 2,364 101 54,329 26,771
9 @alexander_baransky 2,697 2,448 2,105 481 56,797 25,092
10 @sergey_d 2,690 2,681 2,338 8 18,728 6,311

9,986 users have contributed to the identification of the first 1,000,000 observations from Ukraine by now. The top identifiers with over 20,000 IDs are @davydovbotany (172,292 - vascular plants and all-around), @kharkovbut (40,053 - Lepidoptera and Odonata), @sotnik_on (37,844 - Coleoptera and insects all-around), @igor_olshanskyi (33,461 - vascular plants), @svetlana-bogdanovich (26,771 - Crimean vascular plants and Crimea all-around), @alexander_baransky (25,092 - vascular plants), @roman-evseev (24,624 - all-around), @churilovam (24,297 - vascular plants). There are no foreign identifiers in our top 10, several in top 20. Other identifiers from Ukraine who have significantly contributed to identifying specific groups, at least from my point of view, include (but are not limited to) @valeriidarmostuk (lichens), @sergey_d (Lepidoptera), @petro_hryniuk and @olexandr_ghryb (birds, especially by the voices), @mikhailrusin (rodents, shrews and mammals all-around), @maxstereo (ichneumonid wasps and all-around), @sphex (crabronid wasps and animals all-around), @odonataly (Odonata and insects all-around), @filantus and @gansucha (spiders), @yuliyakutsokon and @yurij_ivancea (fishes), @gural-sverlova (terrestrial molluscs), @mikhail46 (aquatic molluscs and crustaceans), @katerina_kashirina (Crimean vascular plants), @georgebondarenko (vascular plants), @nerruslan (Coleoptera), @viktor_yep (Lepidoptera), @makitpa (myriapods), @oleh_prylutskyi (“higher” fungi). Many thanks to them and to others who have contributed to the identification!

The first observation from Ukraine was uploaded on iNat in August 2012 (iNat started in 2008), one of a bobak marmot, Marmota bobak, by @serggrek.

By the end of 2015 there were only 252 observations of 142 species by 14 users from Ukraine with @serhiypopoff dominating (102/71).

Stats for Ukraine by the end of each year since 2016 (by uploading dates; numbers were not the same at those years because there were fewer IDs and some stuff was deleted, as well as some numbers will change because of the future IDs and deleted observations).

Year Observations (all) Species - all Species - non-casual Observers Top observer by observations Top observer by species - all Top observer by species - non-casual
2016 303 172 146 23 @serhiypopoff (113) @serhiypopoff (75) @serhiypopoff (75)
2017 866 500 463 77 @missnarjess (295) @missnarjess (169) @missnarjess (168)
2018 8,260 2,639 2,370 796 @efarilis (3,333) @efarilis (948) @efarilis (945)
2019 39,581 5,212 4,622 1,984 @efarilis (7,133) @efarilis (1,336) @efarilis (1,332)
2020 181,456 9,752 8,893 4,194 @katerina_kashirina (13,457) @sergey_d (2,078) @sergey_d (2,068)
2021 448,105 13,046 11,613 7,220 @svetlana-bogdanovich (27,184) @sergey_d (2,332) @sergey_d (2,323)
2022 729,647 16,149 13,920 8,998 @svetlana-bogdanovich (43,841) @oleksandr_shynder (3,676) @yuri_bengus (2,858)
now 1,000,367 18,379 15,683 10,304 @alexander_baransky (56,797) @oleksandr_shynder (4,386) @igor117 (3,553)

During 2021 iNaturalist was translated into Ukrainian. It was initiated and supported from a project of @mikhailrusin, interface and some texts on the website were translated by @yatsuk_iryna and @oleh_prylutskyi. Many Ukrainian taxa names were accumulated by @valeriidarmostuk, @davydovbotany, @vitalii_1984, @yuliyakutsokon, @oleksandr_zinenko, myself and others (these were automatically uploaded from Excel tables by the iNat team in 2021). Both before and after that, many users have manually added numerous Ukrainian species names, as well as improved and deepened the website's translation. Much work still remains, particularly concerning Ukrainian taxa names. This is very significant, even for many Ukrainians proficient in English, as a substantial part of the interest in using iNat lies in learning the local names of the species we encounter.

The most significant iNat events in Ukraine were probably “Independence Day of Ukraine 2022”, “World Bioblitz in support of Ukraine 2023”, “City Nature Challenge 2023 Ukraine”, “City Nature Challenge 2023 Kyiv” organized by @odonataly, as well as “Ukrainian Winter Bioblitz 2022/2023” and “Ukrainian Summer Bioblitz 2021” organized by @davydovbotany.

iNaturalist is used in the educational process in several institutions of Ukraine, including our top Kyiv University, where @odonataly has widely implemented it for student’s zoological practice and even published a nice methodological guide on it (2022).

Another nice text in Ukrainian is these instructions on how to use iNat by @oleh_prylutskyi with @davydovbotany (2020).

Starting from 2023 we also have a Telegram chat, “iNaturalist UKR”, for discussing iNat in Ukrainian, it’s managed by @odonataly. There are some interesting guidelines and suggestions. Btw, my suggestions on how to photograph molluscs for iNat were initially posted there (it was idea of @odonataly to write them), but later I’ve posted updated illustrated versions on the iNat journal, in English and Ukrainian.

7 observations from Ukraine were chosen as “iNat Observation of the Day” (0.2% from all of them).

The 10 most observed species in 1,000,0000 observations from Ukraine are common mistletoe, Viscum album (6,363, plant); common oak, Quercus robur (3,739, plant); greater celandine, Chelidonium majus (3,040, plant); common sunburst lichen, Xanthoria parietina (2,763, lichen); boxelder maple, Acer negundo (2,708, plant); annual fleabane, Erigeron annuus (2,419, plant); harlequin lady beetle, Harmonia axyridis (2,400, insect); common nettle, Urtica dioica (2,179, plant); common ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia (2,171, plant); Scots pine, Pinus sylvestris (2,081, plant). It’s rather abnormal, except the harlequin lady beetle, in most of the other countries and worldwide the birds are dominating (with some most noticeable insects). So our plantwatchers defeated the birdwatchers. It’s also notable that 4 of these 10 species are invasive in Ukraine.

Some stats by the selected taxonomical groups from 1,000,000 Ukrainian observations. “ID rates” are indicated for the non-“casuals” and compared with Austria, Germany and France, as European countries in similar latitudes with rather good stats on iNat, and with Europe in general (some numbers will change because of the future IDs and deleted observations).

Taxa Observations (all) % from a million Species - all Species - non-casual % of this group’s species estimated for Ukraine (c.), non-casual % of all species on iNat from Ukraine, non-casual % of RG - Ukraine % of RG - Austria % of RG - Germany % of RG - France % of RG - Europe
all 1,000,367 100% 18,379 15,683 26% 100% 68% 66% 67% 64% 67%
all plants 614,514 61% 6,913 4,861 ? 31% 76% 75% 68% 59% 67%
- mosses 6,981 0.7% 178 174 25% 1% 37% 47% 51% 44% 42%
- hepatics 508 0.05% 39 39 20% 0.2% 71% 72% 75% 63% 68%
- vascular plants 603,481 60% 6,617 4,569 76% 29% 77% 76% 69% 59% 68%
Mycetozoa 1,352 0.1% 57 57 ? 0.4% 30% 25% 31% 36% 33%
all fungi 55,481 5.5% 1,951 1,942 30% 12% 44% 41% 39% 35% 38%
- Agaricomycetes 29,207 3% 1,045 1,039 ? 7% 36% 46% 39% 34% 39%
- Lecanoromycetes 17,292 1.7% 353 352 ? 2% 66% 41% 48% 47% 44%
all animals 325,735 32.5% 9,302 8,670 20% 55% 71% 66% 71% 71% 71%
- Cnidaria 421 0.04% 30 7 15% 0% 78% 85% 61% 77% 76%
- Annelida 737 0.07% 29 28 5% 0.1% 20% 10% 13% 33% 22%
- all molluscs 13,382 1.3% 310 267 65% 1.7% 76% 62% 57% 64% 61%
-- Caenogastropoda 590 0.06% 43 29 ? 0.1% 77% 54% 58% 72% 67%
-- Hygrophila 860 0.1% 25 23 ? 0.1% 84% 54% 64% 55% 64%
-- Stylommatophora 10,687 1% 169 160 80% 1% 77% 65% 58% 59% 60%
-- Bivalvia 1,064 0.1% 56 45 ? 0.5% 59% 77% 58% 59% 55%
- all arthropods 217,171 22% 7,743 7,634 15% 49% 68% 57% 62% 64% 63%
-- all crustaceans 2,168 0.2% 131 121 10% 1% 58% 52% 73% 74% 71%
--- Branchiopoda 210 0.02% 16 15 70% 0% 51% 63% 44% 28% 40%
--- Copepoda 33 0% 10 10 5% 0% 10% 9% 2% 3% 5%
--- Amphipoda 62 0% 8 8 5% 0% 2% 14% 14% 11% 12%
--- Isopoda 1,219 0.1% 56 56 ? 0.3% 60% 53% 80% 77% 74%
--- Decapoda 570 0.05% 37 28 60% 0.2% 72% 81% 82% 86% 84%
-- all arachnids 17,453 1.7% 476 465 10% 3% 42% 43% 49% 56% 48%
--- spiders 15,247 1.5% 351 342 30% 2% 44% 42% 48% 56% 48%
--- harvestmen 572 0.05% 26 26 60% 0.1% 48% 67% 81% 81% 70%
--- mites 1,496 0.15% 91 90 5% 0.6% 20% 17% 26% 20% 24%
-- myriapods 1,618 0.16% 39 38 25% 0.2% 50% 23% 34% 58% 38%
-- Entognatha 361 0.04% 32 32 5% 0.2% 30% 22% 39% 38% 32%
-- all insects 195,058 19.5% 7,064 6,978 20% 44% 64% 59% 63% 66% 65%
--- Odonata 7,571 0.7% 72 70 90% 0.4% 86% 71% 84% 90% 85%
--- Orthoptera 7,367 0.7% 132 131 60% 0.8% 66% 86% 78% 75% 74%
--- Hymenoptera 21,674 2% 939 931 5% 6% 41% 34% 39% 39% 40%
--- Coleoptera 44,005 4% 1,864 1,851 30% 12% 68% 59% 67% 65% 65%
--- Lepidoptera 72,759 7% 2,251 2,218 40% 14% 76% 77% 80% 76% 79%
--- Diptera 17,636 1.7% 889 881 15% 6% 27% 27% 34% 38% 36%
--- all Hemiptera 16,987 1.7% 704 698 ? 4% 63% 59% 68% 70% 66%
---- Heteroptera 13,088 1.3% 409 405 50% 3% 75% 73% 78% 79% 77%
---- Auchenorrhyncha 2,219 0.2% 128 127 ? 0.8% 34% 43% 44% 48% 40%
---- Sternorrhyncha 1,603 0.16% 167 166 ? 1% 10% 9% 14% 13% 14%
- all vertebrates 93,631 9% 1127 679 83% 4% 93% 90% 94% 92% 93%
-- fishes (Actinopterygii) 2,422 0.2% 312 151 60% 1% 80% 85% 76% 86% 83%
-- amphibians 4,487 0.4% 37 22 100% 0.1% 70% 83% 77% 74% 83%
-- reptiles 5,418 0.5% 82 25 96% 0.1% 99% 98% 97% 99% 97%
-- birds 69,320 7% 455 362 90% 2% 96% 94% 97% 95% 96%
-- mammals 11,797 1.2% 229 115 95% 0.7% 80% 75% 80% 80% 79%

Large speciose eukaryote groups in Ukraine that nearly not covered on iNat and not listed above are algae (c. 5000 species), other protists (c. 1200), flatworms (c. 1300), rotifers (c. 600) and nematodes (c. 800). Together it's about 15% of the estimated biodiversity in Ukraine that unlikely to be covered on iNat significantly unless some experts on these groups will be uploading observations (or if some easily available and very advanced technologies will appear in the future). The same also applies to probably even more species of various fungi and arthropods.

Therefore, comparing to other countries on iNat, we actually have rather good ID rates in the speciose groups with good potential for identification by photo, except large fungi (Agaricomycetes, etc), mosses, crustaceans, orthopterans, dipterans and some groups of heteropterans.

Just tagging here also some other active contributors from Ukraine not mentioned above, who could be interested @koniakin_serhii @ivanmoysiyenko @vkolomiychuk @martsun_oleg @anasta_kz @viktoria @sergotravelian @maryna_zakharova @galyna_mykytynets @mykytaperegrym @dr_zamoroka @ruslan_gleb @lena_miskova @vlasta_loya @olena_fomina @kateryna_kalashnik @mykola_borysenko @nadiiaskobel @skazhenijandrew @halyna9 @bazazga @yuliia_spinova @kasya_harb @iryna_dovhaniuk @alposylaev @andrey_novgorodsky @fejanor @beren_ua @sashauhnivenko @maria_2021 @petya21 @kateryna_filiuta @alexandra_glevaha @kyrylo_sirenko @lavrusik_denys @igorpyshnyi @naturalist30931 @olsher @olegrozhko @andriy_miskov @khodos @annakuzemko @lavrinenkokaterina @spriahailo @driadash @olesya_bezsmertna @hanna_kuzyo @yehoryatsiuk @juliana_leshchenko @maksym_gavrilyuk

Posted on Σεπτέμβριος 16, 2023 1020 ΜΜ by igor117 igor117

Σχόλια

Nice! But Carl! Hymenoptera species is only 939!

Αναρτήθηκε από maxstereo 10 μήνες πριν

Не сумніваюсь, що буде ще багато наступних мільйонів. І дуже багато нових користувачів INaturalist. Але перший мільйон буває лише один раз у житті. Дуже приємно))).
Звісно, наше життя сильно змінила війна і експедицій стало значно менше, частина активних користувачів - захищають Україну на фронті. очевидно що спостережень менше ніж могло бути. Але дякуючи INaturalist ми можемо робити більш детальні дослідження там, де живемо і так, куди все ж виходить поїхати.

Αναρτήθηκε από vasyliuk1 10 μήνες πριν

Casuals... they are different. Some are "legitimate" (eg., cultivated plants or butterflies in a butterfly house), some are just (obviously) wrongly located, some are without any photographic evidence... But I have no idea how to separate them in a statistics like this one.

Αναρτήθηκε από kharkovbut 10 μήνες πριν

@kharkovbut, observations marked as "captive/cultivated" can be filtered, and most of our "casuals" fall into this category. Less than 1% of all our observations are "casuals" that are not labeled as "captive/cultivated" (either missing some data or have incorrect data). However, some observations marked as "captive/cultivated" also lack data or contain incorrect data. This is the most problematic area, and it seems that it hasn't been thoroughly thought through on iNat. Therefore, I believe that if an observation is problematic, it should be marked as "casual" for reasons other than being "captive." I've even corrected some entries, such as museum specimens, changing them from "captive" to "wrong location." I think iNat is missing a category for marking "casual" dead specimens that have been displaced significantly by humans, like exotic butterflies and sea shells.

Αναρτήθηκε από igor117 10 μήνες πριν
Αναρτήθηκε από kharkovbut 10 μήνες πριν

@kharkovbut it's probably because someone blacklisted you (or you blacklisted someone), try to check the links while not logined on iNat

Αναρτήθηκε από igor117 10 μήνες πριν

@igor117 Right, I am blacklisted by at least one user from Ukraine with lots of observations... That must be the reason. Thanks!

Αναρτήθηκε από kharkovbut 10 μήνες πριν
Αναρτήθηκε από kharkovbut 10 μήνες πριν

@kharkovbut it's interesting that many of those "casuals minus captive/cultivated" are only missing the date, and aside from that, they are rather nice observations, people sometimes simply forget to add the date when submitting their observations.

Αναρτήθηκε από igor117 10 μήνες πριν

@igor117 Right. Same thoughts.

Just in case, here are the same, but with photos: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?captive=false&photos&place_id=8860&quality_grade=casual&subview=map&verifiable=any

In most cases, the date is missing or incorrect.

Αναρτήθηκε από kharkovbut 10 μήνες πριν

Цікаво бачити в перших рядках статистики людину, яка с вій час докоряла мені за "пропаганду та рекламу "ІНатуралітса"))
А взагалі я задоволений, мої мрії в цьому напрямку здійснилісь на всі 100, Україна вже на рівні з країнами ЕС, і наукових співробітників багато.
Хоча є деякі моменти повьязані з ростом ситеми, зявились спостерігачі які просто ніби виконують план та викладують все подряд чи визначають за ради кількості визначень, деяки користувачи влаштовюуть бородьбу за "чистоту даних", використовуючи трохи стрьомні методи..
Але головне- це дуже ліберальний та цінуючий індивидуалізм ресурс, що не дивно через його похождення.
Тут не примушують публікувати точні координати, навпаки, є ряд інструментів для приховування координат, і цілком политика дуже либеральна..
Доречи, навіть "чорний список" тут не має абсолютну дію, на справді подивитись спостереження та отримати лист видів можно і без разлогінення, тут взагалі багато технічних можливостей, в тому числи для реалізації такої собі концепції стримання та противаг.

Αναρτήθηκε από efarilis 10 μήνες πριν

А от що до мітки "casual", то як на мене її логика потребує доробки, наприклад, я хочу подивитись де пасуть овець, але через те що відображають тікі по якимось дивном причинам "незаказулені" спостереження, всю повноту не можно побачити, отже в фільтрах потрібна опція щоб можно було виводити в тому числі і спостереження з міткою "casual".
Часто її ставлять неправомірно, бо наприклад більшисть дворових собак та котів це тварини що розмножуються сами по собі, особливо собаки, якіх можно зустріті з виводком в норах далеко від міста. Ще дуже спірна концепция козуліти дерева, яки були висажені в парках та посадках, як це роблять деяки науковці. Дерево в таких місцях по факту не культивується, бере повноцінну участь в природних процессах, можуть потенційно розмножуватись, висаджування таких дерев це по суті такий собі випадок зоохорії. Але то таке, хто хоче- через систему противаг скіне мітку, таке теж можливо.

Αναρτήθηκε από efarilis 10 μήνες πριν

@efarilis ну чого, цілком можна відфільтрувати окремо овець "у неволі" і подивитися де вони пасуться, "в неволі" є у фільтрі:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?captive=true&place_id=8860&taxon_id=121578&verifiable=any
чи і все разом казуальні+неказуальні:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=8860&taxon_id=121578&verifiable=any
Чи можна і окремо саме всі казуальні, якісь з яких можуть бути казуальними з інших причин ніж "в неволі", але це не можна зробити через поточні налаштування фільтру, тільки в старому інтерфейсі чи вручну написавши лінк (в нашому випадку це +1 спостереження):
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=8860&taxon_id=121578&quality_grade=casual&verifiable=any
Треба додати до лінку "quality_grade=casual" і воно має бути відділене з обох боків "&". Інша справа що складно зрозуміти де саме вівці пасуться з таких спостережень як це ;)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/22035177

Αναρτήθηκε από igor117 10 μήνες πριν

@igor117 дійсно, опція "captive" тепер дає можливість дивитись спостереження, які були помічені як "не дикі", дякую.!
Просто ранійше було так, що всі "закозулені" спостереження якось показувались на мапі через фільтр, отже розробники чомусь це змінили.
І ранійше ніби була окрема мітка "captive/cultivated".
Взагалі читав на форумах ІНат , що це все через те, що іноді викладають фотки людей, і через це мабуть власники сайту бояться судів, але і відалити формально таку фотку неможно, тому фотки людей автоматично помічаються як casual, а щоб їх не показувала система, зробили таку мутку, бо ранійше по H. sapiens видавлись результати, а зараз ні.
В мене є так спостереження, воно автоматично закозулилось
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/171997433
хоча тут все нормально)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/171997427
А з того спостереження можно зрозуміти, що вівці є десь в околицях міста, і що їх багато.

Αναρτήθηκε από efarilis 10 μήνες πριν

Взагалі, виходить, щоб подивитись всі "заборонені" спостереження треба просто зняти опцію "Verifable", яка стоїть по замовченню, тоді можно подивитись де і які знаходять викопні рештки мамонтів, наприлад, чи спостереження без фото та дати. Ще раз дуже дякую!
Ранійше регулярно дививися такі спостереження, а потім якось вони зникли.

Αναρτήθηκε από efarilis 10 μήνες πριν

Προσθήκη σχόλιου

Συνδεθείτε ή Εγγραφή για να προσθέσετε σχόλια