Photographs as an essential biodiversity resource: drivers of gaps in the vascular plant photographic record

High rate of species misidentification reduces the taxonomic certainty of European biodiversity databases of ivies (Hedera L.)

The digitization of natural history specimens and the popularization of citizen science are creating an unprecedented availability of large amounts of biodiversity data. These biodiversity inventories can be severely affected by species misidentification, a source of taxonomic uncertainty that is rarely acknowledged in biodiversity data management. For these reasons, taxonomists debate the use of online repositories to address biological questions at the species level. Hedera L. (ivies) provides an excellent case study as it is well represented in both herbaria and online repositories with thousands of records likely to be affected by high taxonomic uncertainty. We analyze the sources and extent of taxonomic errors in the identification of the European ivy species by reviewing herbarium specimens and find a high misidentification rate (18% on average), which varies between species (maximized in H. hibernica: 55%; H. azorica: 48%; H. iberica: 36%) and regions (maximized in the UK: 38% and Spain: 27%). We find a systematic misidentification of all European ivies with H. helix behind the high misidentification rates in herbaria and warn of even higher rates in online records. We compile a spatial database to overcome the large discrepancies we observed in species distributions between online and morphologically reviewed records.

Quantifying error in occurrence data: Comparing the data quality of iNaturalist and digitized herbarium specimen data in flowering plant families of the southeastern United States

iNaturalist has the potential to be an extremely rich source of organismal occurrence data. Launched in 2008, it now contains over 150 million uploaded observations as of May 2023. Based on the findings of a limited number of past studies assessing the taxonomic accuracy of participatory science-driven sources of occurrence data such as iNaturalist, there has been concern that some portion of these records might be misidentified in certain taxonomic groups. In this case study, we compare Research Grade iNaturalist observations with digitized herbarium specimens, both of which are currently available for combined download from large data aggregators and are therefore the primary sources of occurrence data for large-scale biodiversity/biogeography studies. Our comparisons were confined regionally to the southeastern United States (Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Virginia). Occurrence records from ten plant families (Gentianaceae, Ericaceae, Melanthiaceae, Ulmaceae, Fabaceae, Asteraceae, Fagaceae, Cyperaceae, Juglandaceae, Apocynaceae) were downloaded and scored on taxonomic accuracy. We found a comparable and relatively low rate of misidentification among both digitized herbarium specimens and Research Grade iNaturalist observations within the study area. This finding illustrates the utility and high quality of iNaturalist data for future research in the region, but also points to key differences between data types, giving each a respective advantage, depending on applications of the data.