Open Collections

Abstract

The emergence of iNaturalist has been highly beneficial to scientists by sparking interest in biodiversity and enabling a wide range of community and scientific contributors to generate large, recently documented observational datasets. iNaturalist publishes all research grade observations to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) on a weekly basis and has become the third-largest data contributor to GBIF. iNaturalist offers several advantages, including facilitating connections between researchers and citizen scientists by providing a convenience platform and encouraging broader public participation in biodiversity research. However, iNaturalist also presents several limitations that should be carefully considered when sharing or utilizing its dataset for scientific research. Researchers must pay close attention to issues related to data quality, such as the photo quality and the accuracy of geographic coordinates. In this paper, two case studies are discussed to further illustrate the existing drawbacks of using iNaturalist data. Based on these case studies, several recommendations are proposed to help researchers minimize bias in their studies and assist observers in improving data quality. Addressing these concerns is essential for ensuring the objectivity and reliability of research outcomes.