wordless Wednesday

naming nature

Art sent me a book under the guise of my non-birthday last year.  It's Naming Nature: The Clash Between Instinct and Science by Carol Kaesuk Yoon.  I'm not a big reader, so it sat on my shelf for 9 months until Andy and I went to a cabin for holiday this spring (read: no internet, no tv, no phone).  Naming Nature made sense to me at the time and provided a good historical summary, most of which I've long forgotten the details.  I also took along my perennial favorite Prodigal Summer by Barbara Kingsolver, which I read through twice (it's total book candy) while it rained.

Given my recent discovery of my own religious-based beliefs still lurking about in the grey matter, I think it's time to give Carol's Naming Nature another read through.  Let's see what will stick this time around under a refocused lens of understanding.

I'm guessing my written lines from my last blog post's edit, "As humans, I think we have an instinctive need to identify things, although our ability to do so is not always intuitive.  What are you?  It's in our nature." came directly from having read Carol's book.  It's funny how the mind works.

Art and Jim also sent me several scientific papers, a book chapter, and a dissertation all covering related topics on speciation, subspeciation, the molecular phylogentics of Eriogonum, and the issues that arise when taxonomy meets law.  I'll admit to being a bit intimidated by the technical details that read like Greek to me, and that's one of the points of Carol's book of how science, as it's practiced today, is largely out of reach to the average Joe.

One of the goals that I set out for Nature ID was to invite folks to "learn along with me."  Despite the foolishness I've displayed as of late, that invitation still stands.  Take a look at the book if you want (I recommend it), and feel free to comment.

ps - Has anyone else noticed their reading comprehension is easier from a printed physical page compared to an electronic pdf?  I'm loathed to print out so much paper, but...  I wonder if this holds true for kids growing up in the digital age who are learning to read primarily from computer screens?

what are you?

me and my brothers (August 1976)

Nature ID is my learning tool to help me find answers when I take pictures of little living things, here and there, plants, butterflies, what have you, and I ask, "What are you?" The funny thing is, I get asked this question all the time of me. Even when it's not Halloween. By complete strangers.  "What...  are...  you?" in a loud, slow, measured way, as if I can't hear (uh, yes, I have a hearing impairment, but that's beside the point).  I get asked as if I were somehow not human.  As if I were a chair, or a dog.  "What are you?"  I've been asked so often in my life that I count down, 3, 2, 1, for the follow-up questions that are sure to come in rapid-fire succession, "Chinese?  Japanese?  No?  What are you?"  It used to piss me off.  Okay.  It still pisses me off. I have yet to come up with a witty reply, because so often I'm stunned into silence by the sheer surprise of the question.  Any suggestions?

Andy has been lamenting that I haven't been posting to my blog very much recently.  He's been extremely supportive of this hobby I started over 5 years ago, which is now a huge part of my life.  After a couple crappy job interviews this past spring, I decided to use what I love about Nature ID and what I've learned and direct all my energies into something new, something yet undefined, something of my own creation.  And, it's scary.

I'm now asking myself that same funny, pissy question, "What are you?"  Haha.  I'm in one of those awkward developing and gangly growing stages, and more than ever, I'm afraid of looking like an idiot.  Am I merely one of those annoying people who asks far too many inappropriate questions?  Am I a naturalist?  Am I a lepidopterist?  Am I a botanist?  Am I a phenologist?  Am I a citizen scientist?  Am I an actual scientist?  What does that even mean?  Where will I be in another 5 years?

So, I don't know how to proceed with this blog.   I've learned a lot this year, and it's difficult to translate that as a continuing process in an online format that gets forever saved in time by RSS feeds and search engine spiders.  Hey, as I find errors on Nature ID, I've gone back and corrected them.  And, there are a lot of errors.  Eh-hem.

Time and time again, I've seen how misinformation gets spread around by people who act like they know everything.  I think we all fool ourselves at times, some more than others, even though I'd like to believe I'm self-aware and forthright when I don't know something.  It's been called to my attention that this gives off the impression that I don't know much of anything, especially among folks who apparently know even less and who actually advised me to shut up and blindly defer to the old guys.

This does not sit well with me.

There were a couple years or so while I was learning English, when I could understand what people were saying, but I could not speak it.  My mother told me that I was a chatterbox when I first arrived, but as soon as I figured out that no one around could understand me in my native language, she said I went quiet for a very long time.  Quite frankly, I was scared silent by the strange, slow monster speak coming from these fair-skinned giants with big, blue eyes.  Once I got the hang of English, she joked that she could never get me to shut up again.  Ha!

I've discovered I'm in a similar situation now, in that I understand a lot more than I have the vocabulary to express.  It's frustrating as hell.  However, just like when I was a kid playing with the big boys, I can stand up for myself, even if I can't speak the speak of all the -ists out there. Yet.  Watch out, guys!

ps - It's National Adoption Month, btw.

pss 01/15/15 - For those still hung up on the question "What are you?" that I purposely did not answer, please refer to this New York Times article on adoptees returning to their home country.  It's not an easy question to answer when you've lived it like I have.

pss 05/18/19 - The thoughts and words I typed out here were completely my own in 2014.  Imagine my surprise to find people's comments about Keanu Reeves and their own experiences regarding the ridiculously offensive question of "What are you?"

photo series ~ 04/08-08/26/14 ~ Pinnacles National Park - west

April 8, 2014 to August 26, 2014

Pinnacles National Park - west entrance

posted 09/02/14 - My weekly Tuesday Pinnacles practice visits have come to an end.  It's been quite a journey and an utterly unique experience that began essentially 6 months ago when I visited Pinnacles on February 25, 2014.  This vantage point from the westside parking lot doesn't highlight the seasonal changes as dramatically as some of my other photo series (posted here or in my archives), however it is the longest continuous run I have at 21 weeks.  They were not my primary purpose, but it was easy to do and I liked seeing the changes over time.  It never rained on me once in this record-breaking drought year.  I surprised my finicky self, so dedicated to this project that I even went out hiking in 105°F weather.  Good golly, that was hot, hot, hot!  Now that it's done, maybe I'll get around to backposting more of my photos?  

photo series ~ 05/06-08/12/14 ~ Pinnacles National Park - west

May 6, 2014 to August 12, 2014

Pinnacles National Park - west entrance

Another seasonal photo series tester that I was playing around with.  These were taken 1 week apart for a total of 15 weeks. There were a handful of weeks in the middle where everything appeared to remain unchanged.  I wasn't consistent about taking this vantage point in the morning or in the afternoon, hence the random shadows.  I'd like to try this again, starting earlier in the spring when grasses are still green.  And, if I can find the right software, I'd like to center the photos around the big red rock in the distance.  Does anyone have suggestions?

ps 09/02/14 - I posted this earlier, and then removed it.  I had plans to stabilize it, thanks to Neil Kelley's suggestion.  Unfortunately, I couldn't make heads or tails out of the freeware with the plugin that he suggested.  Sorry, Neil!

photo series ~ 05/13/14-07/29/14 ~ Pinnacles National Park - west

woolly yerba santa, woolly Indian paintbrush, California buckwheat

Eriodictyon tomentosum, Castilleja foliolosa, Eriogonum fasciculatum var. foliolosum
Boraginaceae, Orobanchaceae, Polygonaceae
May 13, 2014 to July 29, 2014

Pinnacles National Park - west entrance

Can you see the rhythm of nature's clock?  Look how the paintbrush trades its colors with the CA buckwheat.  I started taking these pictures on a whim and have been pleasantly impressed by the sly seasonal color changes at Pinnacles.  When I parsed these 12 weekly photos into 2 sets every other week, it becomes apparent that the rate of change is not a constant.  Fascinating.

ps 09/10/14 - I changed the var. of CA buckwheat from polifolium to what I believe is the greener, more common one along the road.

gray hairstreak ~ 07/17/14 ~ Podere di Farfalla

"Eh?  What's this?  You're going to take my picture?"

"No, please don't.  I'm not ready"

"Hold on a sec.  Let me spruce up a bit."

"OK, I'm ready.  Go ahead and take my picture."
male gray hairstreak perched on seacliff buckwheat
male Strymon melinus pudica perched on Eriogonum parvifolium 
Polygonaceae

What's not obvious in many of my pictures is how breezy it frequently is, which makes it very difficult to take clear shots of tiny butterflies even when they're perched on a plant.  I took the above set with the pocket camera held still while the buckwheat was waving about in the wind.  Seriously.  I've been loving the auto-macro feature on our 10-year-old Konica Minolta DiMAGE X50.  It's incredibly easy, although it's not as quick as I would like and only has 5 megapixels.  It's a shame it took us 9 years before we discovered this cool feature.  However, I'm worried that because of its age, it might crap out any day now.  I've been looking for a replacement and haven't found anything remotely equivalent.  I field tested other point-and-shoot cameras this summer and was less than pleased with the fuzzy not-really-macro results.  I'd welcome any suggestions for a replacement/addition to our Konica.

unidentified Satyrium hairstreak ~ 06/22/14 ~ Chews Ridge

unidentified male Satyrium hairstreak

posted 10/11/14 - This ID has had me stumped ever since June.  Both photo series are of the same individual as I turned around to capture different lighting angles.  It would have been great to get a photo of the topside (dorsal) wing color and abdomen to help ID, but that didn't happen.  As I was asking Chris his thoughts as to what it was, he forgot it was simply sitting on my finger and it promptly flew away into the sun when he made a sudden movement.  That's the handicap I've given myself this year by not collecting specimens.  Honestly, I didn't want to deal with lugging around a net and killing jar, pinning and spreading, and not to mention permit paperwork.  I think scrutinizing photos has been a good learning tool for me, but as evidenced here, it's not perfect.

I sent one of the lighter-colored pics around to my trusted butterfly posse (I hope they don't mind me calling them that), and I received a surprising variety of answers.  Their suggestions for ID are as follows (links open in new windows for photo comparisons):

gold-hunter's hairstreak (Satyrium auretorum) - BOA, BugGuide, Flickr

mountain mahogany hairstreak (Satyrium tetra) - BOA, BugGuide, Flickr

hedgerow hairstreak, aka sepia hairstreak (Satyrium saepium) - BOA, BugGuide, Flickr

I also trust Butterflies of America (BOA) more than self-reported ID sites like BugGuide and Flickr, which both have a few ID errors.  Even UC Irvine's Butterflies of Orange County has what I believe is a gold-hunter's in the middle of hedgerows.  These look-alike spp. are not well-illustrated in my field guides, so we're not alone in our uncertainty.  Can you ID?

ps - After initially insisting it was a mt. mahogany because of how dark it was, I'm now leaning towards a hedgerow hairstreak, mainly because of the tailend patterning.  There's a notable lack of any orange near the tails, which even if worn would have been an indication for gold-hunter's.  Besides, the tails are too long to be a male gold-hunter's, I think.  Oh, how do I know it's a male?  The relief of the teardrop-shaped scent gland (stigma) can be seen in the middle of the hindwing in the shadowier photos.

coast horned lizard ~ 05/23/14 ~ Pinnacles

coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii

Apparently, this cool lizard is now supposed to be called Blainville's horned lizard?  Sigh.  I can't keep up with all the name changes, scientific or common.  Eh, that's not the point of this post, anyways, even though I have seen a few impressively large horned lizards during my many recent activities.

Paul has suggested I try iNaturalist as a way to document and share what I find during my weekly Pinnacles visits.  I haven't decided yet, because I have questions about macro photo quality and GPS capability in a smart phone where there's no cell service.  Click here to see Paul's photo of this same horned lizard using his iPhone 5 (don't know which letter c or s), and then click on my photo above to enlarge.  What do you think about the photo quality comparisons?  I think Paul's appears very tan colored and a little flat, even though my depth of field is shallow.  I'll mainly be taking photos of little butterflies about the size of the lizard's head anyways, but coloring is important.  And, I'm still unsure how to resolve the pseudo-GPS in phones issue.  I heard there are GPS units that bluetooth to the phone, but what a pain and more crap to carry.  Does anyone have any suggestions to obtain accurate GPS linked to a phone-generated photo?  Are there actual GPS phones, not the fake ones reliant on cell service?

Oh, have I mentioned I don't currently have a smart phone?  I've had my flip phone since 2006, which I think is the responsible thing to be aware of in this day and age of disposable everything, including electronics.  I had my last computer for 10 years before I upgraded to iMac.  I really don't need the latest and greatest toy, but it may be time to update.  Plus, we've been needing to switch carriers for some time since many of my calls get dropped at home on the Peninsula where ocean meets spotty cell coverage.  We never had a land line.  There was a bit of a city hall brouhaha over additional cell towers being installed.  On one side were the monarch butterfly lovers who didn't want the overwintering butterflies or themselves to be radiated (is that the term?), and on the other side was the city needing to offer basic public services, like cell phone coverage for emergencies.  The towers went in, cleverly disguised as chimneys.  Are we all being microwaved now?

ps 05/30/14 -  One of the take-aways I got from the Citizen Science Session of the Ocean Science Trust Conference last month was that citizen science could and should be able to provide data rigorous enough for scientific review (Thanks, Lisa Emanuelson!).  So, when a few days later CalAcademy announced their acquisition of iNat, I paid attention.

Ken-ichi Ueda, co-founder of iNaturalist, has been kind enough to reply to my numerous criticisms (hopefully, constructive!) and questions as I figure out the best recording method(s) for my project, which in an unexpected way could also help shape its initial purpose.  With Ken-ichi's permission, here's what he said, "Ok, let's talk tech. For iNat, my recommendation is to get the latest iPhone. Our iOS app is quite a bit better than our Android app, and the iPhone's GPS and camera are great. Here's are some particulars:

IMAGE QUALITY
As you pointed out in your post, the iPhone isn't quite as good as a conventional camera, but it's still pretty good. It doesn't give you much DoF control, but it can be quite sharp, particularly for stable subjects that are close.

GPS
Any device with a real GPS chip should get coordinates *anywhere* it has a clear view of the sky, since it works by communicating with satellites, not ground-based towers. Reception may vary depending on weather, topography, or the particular configuration of satellites in line-of-sight from your position. Devices like the iPhone can improve both the speed of coordinate acquisition and the accuracy of those coordinates by using cell tower and wifi signals, but they aren't required. Almost every cell phone has a real GPS chip on board, including every iPhone and most Android phones. Note that the majority of tablets do NOT have onboard GPS. This includes the iPad.

In my experience the iPhone's GPS functionality is very accurate. If you get a chance to look over someone's shoulder, you'll see that the iNat works by continually acquiring coordinates until it gets the precision below 5m."

To keep this from becoming free advertising for phones and plans, I'm skipping some of what Ken-ichi recommends.  Then, he goes on to say, "Regarding iNat recording devices, keep in mind you don't need a phone to use iNat! You can upload images directly. My usual practice is to use my phone for most observations, but to also carry around my SLR and a handheld GPS in my pack. The GPS is always recording a track, which I use to add geotags to my SLR photos later (I use http://www.earlyinnovations.com/photolinker/ for this, but there are many other such applications, including Lightroom). The SLR is much faster and sharper, so for things like butterflies, that's usually what I'm going to use. Getting identifiable lep shots with a phone takes more time and patience than you can probably spend if you're doing a research project. Most high-end point-and-shoots would probably be as good or even better (in terms of flexibility) than my SLR setup."

Then, I asked questions about iNat itself.

I haven't found where it explains the different color map markers (red, blue, green?).

"Colors relate to the "iconic taxon" of the thing observed: blue for most animals, orange for insects / spiders / molluscs, green for plants, purple for slime molds, brown for chromists, pink for fungi. It isn't really explained anywhere. There are a lot of things on the site we just assume people will figure out for themselves."

I also don't understand how the "Redo search in map area" works, because it comes up with new and different points depending on the zoom level on the map.

"It redoes the search using the bounding box of the current map. It loads different observations because some of the observations in your previous search will be outside the bounding box."

Then, how do you select the marker that sits just below another one when on max zoom?

"I guess you don't, but you can see them all in the list on the right. You can also zoom in much farther with the satellite tiles."

Is it possible to select by week number to see everything found at a particular location in that week of any year?
"You can't look up observation by week, but you can do it by month. If you go to http://www.inaturalist.org/observations and click the "Search" button you'll see a bunch of filters, one of which is a month filter. If you set that and leave year and day blank, you'll see all the observations added in that month, regardless of year."

... He did say he privatizes his locations, does not carry a GPS unit, guesses based on a google app, so maybe that was the result of being "obscured" as well.  It doesn't seem like that should qualify for "research grade".
"... his observations for that day is due to the fact that he obscures the coordinates, which means each observation is displayed at a randomly chosen location somewhere within 10km of the true coordinates. iNat's "research" quality grade doesn't consider how precise the coordinates are, just that you've added them. The name "research" was probably a poor choice since it seems to get people's ire up, but it just means observations of that grade are probably more accurate / complete than others. Then again, the definition of "research" is pretty flexible. For some studies, precision of 50k might be adequate."

Finally, in the spirit of encouragement to become better, I had the audacity to question Ken-ichi's algorithms.  It's a bit meta, and I've noticed not everyone appreciates the different perspective.  In fact, he seemed very receptive to it.  I agreed with him that the freedom to make errors is educational, which is why this hobby blog has been so liberating for me over the past 5 years.  By being okay to make mistakes, being honest in the not knowing, asking those questions, and accepting of others' help, I have learned so much.  Here's Ken-ichi's reply to my algorithms charge:
"I would argue that our crowdsourcing approach generates data that is close to the accuracy of professionally collected data, with the added benefit that it usually comes with media evidence for independent verification. It is generally not as comprehensive as professionally collected data (most casual naturalists aren't going to identify every carabid under a log in the way that a working coleopterist would), but if you look at the inaccuracies present in supposedly professional collections at museums or in GBIF, you will find most of the same geographic biases (no collections far from roads or trails), identification mistakes, and taxonomic confusion... except it's really hard to see this errors because either there's no associated media evidence or you have look at a specimen. An actually quantitative comparison between professional and crowdsourced data collections like this would be a pretty cool outcome of being at CAS. We shall see."

This is all very helpful information for me.  Thanks, Ken-ichi!

The future of natural history documentation is at our feet, a path extending into the digital age through the eyes and hands of millions of curious participants.  I know that sounds corny, but it's true.  This is exciting stuff!  It's too bad it currently selects for the well-to-do with expensive phone requirements, GPS devices, and fancy cameras.  The reality of the situation is nature is available to pretty much everyone... and it's free, if we just put down our electronic devices.

habitat ~ 04/24/14 ~ Garrapata State Park

Garrapata State Park
April 24, 2014

This is only the second time I've ever stopped to visit Garrapata/Soberanes Point.  The first time back on June 2, 2012 was on a Monterey Bay Chapter CNPS trip.  I don't really know what happened to the threatened State Park closure business from 2 years ago.  How would CA State Parks keep people off the property?  I heard something about the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District stepping in to assist with the basics for this remote spot, like toilet paper in the porta-potty, the porta-potty itself, and trash pick-up.  The MPRPD is an awesome park organization, and I wish they could help manage some other local properties (eh-hem, Hatton Canyon, cough, Jacks Peak, cough).

Garrapata is a popular local tourist destination about 5 miles south of Point Lobos, which I also do not visit much.  I'm not fond of how crowded the trail feels, even in the middle of the week.  The path is narrow, and for anyone to pass, you often have to stand to the side in the poison-oak to let them go. We met a couple from Appalachia under the redwoods.  He was a herpetologist, and I enjoyed chatting with him and his wife about their trip and, of course, herps. However, I wondered if he would collect if he found something he liked.  I've been blind to that kind of activity, because I only collect photographs these days.

Honestly, I wouldn't have stopped here had I not been tagging along with Chris Tenney as he searches Monterey County for butterflies.  He had a couple places in mind down the coast, pending the weather.  So often it can be cool, breezy, and foggy.  We lucked out with the sun, and tucked inland there were a couple hot spots totally protected from the wind.  I was quite impressed with the butterfly diversity, because those same narrow, human-crowded paths in the creek canyon also funnel butterflies into a small area of space.  Within 5 feet of Dudleya, we spotted a couple late season Sonoran blues.  

Sigh.  It amazes me how much I've redirected my own life's path in the 2 months since my first Sonoran sighting.  I only recently realized the true reason why I gave up netting as an entomologist.  Basically, I'm too lazy to process specimens on pins and labels.  What a tedious job.  It's so hard for me to admit that.  I'm looking for alternatives and am still considering a Lytro Light Field Camera as my next camera, pending Andy's beta test with his yearbook kids next year (yes, I asked, and the company is agreeable).  Here's a sample of what it can do - click anywhere on the photo to change the focal point.  Eh, it needs some improvement.  Maybe in another year they'll have a better software patch for macro shots?  The potential is exciting.

which reader?

With the upcoming demise of Google Reader, I need to find a new blog reader.  What site are you using for your feeds?  Please comment.  Thanks!

blow-wives ~ 05/03/13 ~ Fort Ord

blow-wives

Achyrachaena mollis

 Asteraceae

posted 05/22/13 - I've seen these before but simply had never bothered to look them up.  Look at what I've been missing.  What a peculiar common name!  I wonder what the story is, because it seems like it should be a good one.  Trying to google it returns some lewd results.  You'll notice I added the fruits/seeds label instead of the flower label. Apparently, the actual flower is a tiny yellow ray flower; it's a native version of the dandelion. I caught the flowering stage a little too late in the bottom center of the first photo. Still, cool beans.

I wanted to note this hike, because I met a local woman online and took her along with me.  She searched the internet for Yadon's piperia after seeing flags just like I did.  She found my images through flickr [I don't know what to make of their recent changes; it's flashier probably for high phone traffic.], which led to my Yadon's blog posts.  We exchanged a couple e-mails and set to meet up. Oddly enough, this is the second time I've actually had a face-to-face with someone I met online because of my Yadon's photos.  Has anyone else experienced that with a particular photo set?

ps - Here are links for later, comparing blow-wives with silverpuffs at Sierra Foothill Garden and the inaccurate picture on Wikipedia, which has unfortunately also populated iNaturalist.org and EOL.org. Editing Wikipedia is a bunch of mumbo jumbo to me, so I asked the iNat fellow to correct this in the interest of internet-kind.  Even, UCSC Natural Reserves has this incorrectly pictured.  Erg!

broad-footed mole ~ 10/21/12 ~ Elkhorn Slough

broad-footed mole

Scapanus latimanus

Hey, it's a mole!  Cool!  A dead one.  Aw, too bad.  Considering I've probably only ever seen one other mole in my life (it was dead, too, in the middle of a trail), I started wondering how I knew this was a mole.  I suspect many people would be able to recognize a picture of a mole without ever having seen one in person.  Why is that?  Children's books?  Nature shows?  Sure, I'd be able to recognize a panda or an alligator if I ever saw one firsthand.  But, moles?  They're not exactly wildly popular animals.

Then, the question for Nature ID becomes, "What kind of mole is it?"  This was a little challenging to research.  Most online pictures of moles are dead, and interestingly they all look like they've been licked by a canine or something.  I don't know why they have a wet licked look about them.  And why do they seem to go above ground to die?  I was fortunate to have found the kind with unusually large front feet to distinguish it from the numerous shrews.  There are 7 spp. of moles in North America.  Of those 7, 4 are found in CA.  Townsend's mole (Scapanus townsendii) and coast mole (Scapanus orarius) are found along the northern CA coast.  S. latimanus has the widest range in CA, but part of Monterey County is the southern-most area for shrew-moles (Neurotrichus gibbsii), which has a longer tail.  As a side note, in these scientific names here I've linked to sibr.com, a database design site which for some reason contains the exact compilation of PDFs found on the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships website in association with the California Department of Fish and Game.  If you want to see larger range maps, select the common name on the CWHR site.  For an extensive sp. account published by the American Society of Mammalogists, check out Smith College>PDFs>No. 666 (it doesn't look like it links to anything, but it opens up a PDF to the publication).  While moles are reported to eat gastropods, beetles, and earthworms (see pub No. 666), it seems they have been targeted as an enemy of the gardener, like gophers.  Poor moles.

crappy photos no more?

blue-eyed darner

Rhionaeshna multicolor

posted 10/09/12 - Here on Nature ID, I've joked about my crappy photos.  It's okay.  I'm good with it.  I'm practically proud, even.  While I sometimes get slightly green around the edges with envy over other bloggers' fantastic photographs taken with great skill and fancy equipment, the fact of the matter is I have little desire to grow in that direction myself.

Our trusty 8-year-old Konica Minolta DiMAGE X50 point-and-shoot has served us well.  It's lightweight, fits in my front shirt pocket or Andy's running belt pocket, old enough that I don't care if it gets a few raindrops or specks of pollen on it, and meets most of our wants most of the time. I'm someone who begrudgingly carries water and won't even take my smallest pair of binoculars on a hike because it doesn't easily fit into a pocket... well, you get the picture.  Or don't you?

As with all electronic gadgets nowadays, things break or become obsolete for whatever reason. Hey, I was "forced" to replace my 10-year-old computer, not because it broke, but because technology and my desire to be online left it in the dust.  Sigh, it's time to start thinking about a replacement camera. Andy came across reviews for Lytro.  I'm not crazy about the awkward shape.  However, capturing an entire light field to create a "living picture" with the capability to refocus after the fact?  Anyone hear of it?  Does anyone know if these active focus pictures can be embedded in blogger, yet?  If so, could you please send me a link to your blogspot?  Any other recommendations?  Granted, like with my computer this may be a 2-year process before I purchase, and by then this new consumer technology will very likely be even better and cheaper.

am I doing the right thing with this blog?

best guess unknown goosefoot
best guess Chenopodium sp.
Amaranthaceae (formerly Chenopodiaceae)

posted 10/02/11 - I featured this plant 06/30/11 when it was just beginning to flower. While doing a search not too long ago for another plant, I found a similar looking plant to this one, and it was not an amaranth. Unfortunately, I failed to make a note of it and can't find it again. Can you ID?

I hope I'm reasonably clear when I am uncertain about an ID. I've added a new label * best guesses for those items which I'm really not sure of the ID. For some posts that I assume I already know, I don't do much research. For other posts, I spend way too much time searching and checking to make sure my ID is correct. It's a challenge to convey how much I do know and how much I'm making my best guess based on the information available to me. Now I always include embedded links to outside sources and better information in the IDs under the pictures.

Yes, my blog is titled Nature ID (and recently re-subtitled "from Monterey Bay and CA areas beyond" to better reflect the locations presented here). I've expressed concern the mere name may lead people to believe I know way more than I do. I seem to experience a constant IDentity crisis. I can't tell you how many e-mails I get from people wanting me to ID their pictures from places I have never been (please don't, btw). I do try to state clearly in my welcome! section in the sidebar that I am not an expert.

With that said, I believe I have a natural visual talent to distinguish shapes and details. I have refrained from talking too much about my education or work here, because I'm afraid readers will make assumptions and judgements about me and this hobby blog. However, for the record, I graduated summa cum laude from the Ohio State University with a Bachelor of Science in Entomology, only after also variously majoring and minoring in fine arts, dance, liberal arts, chemistry, and biology. Through fortune and misfortune, I was a professional entomologist and headed the Invertebrate Zoology Department (which included malacology) at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History. I've had a handful of peer-reviewed research papers published, but I do not consider myself a scientist. I have also worked in the publishing industry as a science content editor at CTB/McGraw-Hill and as an intellectual property manager (rights, permissions, copyrights, and trademarks) for what became National Geographic School Publishing. What's that saying, "Jack of all trades, master of none, though often times better than master of one"? Once again I am wanting to do something different and meaningful in my life. Thanks to doing Nature ID, I'm considering going to graduate school to study salamanders. Still, I am not sure I would make a suitable graduate student or a respectable "real" scientist.

I prefer approaching nature without any preconceived notions and with a "what can I learn?" attitude. Since I don't attempt to ID until I get home and look at my pictures, I try to observe all that I can while out hiking. There are benefits and drawbacks to this practice. It's been fascinating to watch my own learning process. What may stump me one year is perfectly obvious the next year after I have looked up hundreds of other IDs. I do like details, and I try to be as accurate as possible. However, in nature and what we know about it, accuracy is often a relative term.

For over two years I've searched extensively online for local IDs of everything from plants to herps, and I feel I'm slightly more knowledgeable and thorough than some other blogs/sites which sometimes post completely inaccurate information. Considering it irks me how much misinformation is online, I sometimes try to gently correct them (e.g., John Game claims he will change his incorrect Wikipedia photo for Pipera yadonii, which has been reviewed on CalPhotos as likely P. elegans; and the most dangerous site is Plants of California, where they talk about how you can eat soap plant and then picture death camas as their example! Yet, I would not stake my life on the fidelity of the 850+ IDs I have made on Nature ID.

Sigh... the reason why I'm even bringing this topic up is due to the numerous correspondence I received this past week about my blog. Some were lovely e-mails that made me smile and grateful that I am an active blogger (you know who you are, and thank you!). I enjoy blogging and am proud of what I have created here on Nature ID.

I also received a permissions request from a journalist at Pour la Science to use photos of my CA horn snails (I've added a postscript to that post with more information). I was very excited. I've received permissions requests before but never from such a big publication. She found my pictures through an online image search and liked mine. However, when I made clear to her that I am not a professional malacologist, she seemed under deadline stress and declined use of my pictures since she didn't have the time to have my ID checked. Big bummer. I took it to heart.

This virtual experience makes me wonder once again if my blog is adding to the same online misinformation that I so detest, because I do make mistakes! Since I include both common names and scientific names in all my ID posts, my blog is often found through internet searches. For those not familiar with my blog format or translating from another language, it can be difficult to know what information can be trusted. I guess that's true with any site found online. I have considered stopping this blog and not having it available for public consumption. Nature ID really is my personal learning tool, and, at times, I don't think I'm adding much quality to the blogosphere. After all, I don't particularly like taking photos, and I struggle with writing. And, there are much better nature blogs out there, although very few local ones. For the time being, I will continue as I have... learning something new every day.

Here are relevant links:
The Skeptical Moth has a series of media mistakes titled "Genius of the Press".
Deep-Sea News has a field guide to distinguish between scientists and journalists.
Deep-Sea News has a recent blog post about the gap between scientists and journalists.
The Biology Refugia has an excellent discussion about mass media and science.
Culturing Science talks about young or inexperienced science bloggers (with great links).
Nature of a Man does a much better job explaining his IDs and providing references.

ps - As with any post that naval-gazes this much, I will likely continue to edit it for a few days.

pss 10/04/11 - I edited this post a couple times now and made an ID correction. I originally posted this as best guess Amaranthus sp. Thanks to Cindy's comment of the flower buds looking like an Atriplex sp. but with different leaves, I went on a wild goose chase... er, goosefoot hunt. The leaves look like spinach, and after this picture was taken the seeds are starting to look exactly like quinoa. I've corrected my best guess above to a possible Chenopodium sp. Also, I'd like to tell everyone that the journalist I mentioned above sent me a very nice e-mail about how she truly enjoys my blog and nature, and she was simply making a journalistic choice to not publish one of my pictures due to lack of time to check them. I appreciated hearing back from her again.

many-headed slime ~ 12/21/10 ~ Mt. Madonna

many-headed slime
Physarum polycephalum

I have absolutely no idea what group this would even belong. Fungus? Lichen? The yellow venation pattern is visually reminiscent of fall ginko leaves. Does anyone have any clue as to what this is?

ps 01/05/11 and edited 08/18/11 - I originally had this posted as an unknown. It's a slime mold! Who knew this was in the kingdom of protista? Much of its taxonomy is debated beyond my comprehension, but one thing that most agree is that it is not a fungus. And apparently many slime molds move! Thanks to those who have commented, I believe I have a fairly accurate ID of this slime mold.

pss 01/13/11 - Very cool! I had a student from Liverpool John Moores University contact me to ask for permission to use my slime mold picture in her final year project presentation.

pss 08/18/11 - For other blogs posts of slime molds, check out Martin's Moths, Cabinet of Curiosities, and Curbstone Valley Farm. I'm fascinated those in the UK are just now seeing them in late-July to mid-August.

pss 10/09/11 - For an excellent explanation of slime molds with plenty of good links, check out The Biology Refugia.

pss 01/30/12 - Wow, this picture is popular on the internet. I received another permissions request from Mirian Tsuchiya Jerep, a TA for the Biodiversity course at George Mason University. With her OK, here's her request, "I am writing to know if you would allow me to use your slime mold picture in my class. Your picture is so pretty, and it shows where this type of organism is found on the real world, outside the lab. One of my main goals is to make the students connect what they see in the lab with their lives, and that picture is a great example. Of course, I would reference you and your blog as the source. Generally, I post my slides for the students, but if you prefer, I can remove your picture before doing that." Very cool, times two!

pss 11/22/13 - Apparently, this is a popular internet picture.  I received yet another request, this time from Dr. Peer Seipold from the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, Institute for Transport Planning and Logistics.  He's going to be presenting a talk about biomimicry and logisitcs (huh?  really? how?) at Magdeburg 2013: Green Innovations.  Amazing.

pss 05/10/16 - My photo above continues to be of interest, despite there being a virtual explosion of Physarum polycephalum photos in situ online compared to the paucity available back in 2010.  A couple days ago, I received yet another request for use of this photo from a blogger in France who is reporting on incredible recent research of the many-headed slime.  Please check out PK Read's Fast Learners.

an unusually plump California ground squirrel
Otospermophilus beecheyi

OK. I swear this will be my last post of Fatty... unless something unusual happens. I've been laughing all evening while looking through my recent photos. For the past couple weeks, I've had the camera out with hopes to capture the new unknown hawk in our area and the winter songbirds. Mostly, I get bits of trees and blurs of wings, nothing clear enough for a positive ID. While I wait for the birds, I'll take a couple pics of the fat ground squirrel, who is always present and doesn't move much. Haha, it didn't look like it was too pleased with me taking a picture of it eating. How rude of me! And, no, I don't feed the squirrels or the birds. I think all wildlife should earn an honest living. Plus, I wanted to illustrate with the second pic above why my squirrel and bird pics are so fuzzy - I use the maximum zoom setting on my point-and-shoot.

ps - I lied. I forgot I still feed a couple scrub-jays peanuts when they come calling.

old and new

Absolutely love my new computer! Don't know why I hesitated for so long. Well, ok, I'll admit, I'm cheap... er, frugal.

I live simply, partly due to need and partly due to consideration of how my daily living leaves an imprint of waste. If I were more hip, I'd state that I'm being environmentally friendly. I do try to resist the American urge to consume large quantities of disposable and durable goods. Plus, I've moved way too many times and it's a lot of work to haul around junk, up and down 3 flights of stairs. I'm proud my old computer lasted for 10 years. Now, I just need to find a local e-cycler.

I've been thinking about getting a new computer for, oh, 2 years now. At first, we were waiting to see the reviews for Windows 7, since Vista was a general fail. The momentum to finally purchase was prodded by being denied access to several favorite websites in recent months due to the fact my operating system, and hence browser, were no longer compatible. Can you believe I've been able to create Nature ID on such an old system? It's not that the ol' HP doesn't work; it simply isn't supported anymore by commercial, money-hungry... uh, ok, I need to stop.

I'm still in the process of transferring 10-years' worth of files and photos. The shiny red passport thingie my hubby has isn't recognized by WinME even with a USB booster and several attempts to download drivers. So, I'm improvising and using the camera card. Hey, it works, and it's just as time-consuming as burning CDs. Yeh, we have the capability to network, but neither of us can remember the darn password.

I'm already missing having a 10-key. You'll notice my mouses are on the left thanks to a series of lefties with whom I shared Macs with 20 years ago. I'm right-handed, but I've found it useful and intuitive to be able to use both hands when entering large amounts of data into spreadsheets and databases. I'm totally inept if I'm forced to use a mouse with my right hand, kinda like trying to write your name with the wrong hand.

Sigh... the luxuries of a new computer... even if the getting it set up and adjusting to a new keyboard is a total PITA!