Has the bird identification in Europe reached a plateau? (1 Viewer)

[Andy Adcock]

Or refuse to take part in it. AI is scary (probably topic for another thread) - was listening to program the other day about the arms race wrt world superpowers and automonous AI war machines.

I'll bet that despite all the cute doggy stuff, Boston Dynamics are all over it..................but that is another topic

 

[Mysticete]

I agree that subtle ID features can now be examined on photos, but these ID fetures are also already known, and written in books for ringers. A closed topic.

I have a wild idea: It is possible to see all details of birds plumage, and even collect DNA sample in the field. The only thing remains: getting exact measurements of a bird is not possible without catching it.

How might it be possible to get precise measurements, down to a milimetre, of a living, unrestrained bird in the field? Is there any branch of business where objects are measured down to a milimetre remotely? How a technology might look like? Meticulously measure a branch or heaps of soil on which the bird was photographed before? Use some sort of a laser measuring device, possibly linked with a camera?

I don't know about down to the millimeter scale, but there are plenty of papers out there on field estimation of whale and seal body sizes. So I would think with the right equipment and formulas it should be possible to estimate size in unrestrained wild birds.

 

[dantheman]

How might it be possible to get precise measurements, down to a milimetre, of a living, unrestrained bird in the field? Is there any branch of business where objects are measured down to a milimetre remotely? How a technology might look like? Meticulously measure a branch or heaps of soil on which the bird was photographed before? Use some sort of a laser measuring device, possibly linked with a camera?

Relative proportions presumably not a problem and technology there already, and probably more useful for id than actual size (which varies anyway between sexes/races/individuals). So ratio of bill length to eg eye diameter or comparing emarginations etc. All that can be done by photos already and so real time photos and modelling (like facial recognition software etc).


Science fiction perhaps but I've always thought that remote brain wave pattern analysis would be the ultimate id clincher - you point the the device at the creature flying by or in the field and it picks up the unique brain wave patterns and ids it ... ;-)

 

[Xenospiza]

AI can work reasonably well for taxa you can identify by looking at the general picture (e.g. moths, dragonflies and birds).
It does not work for taxa where you have to look at combinations (umbellifers, grasses, fungi).
It definitely does not (yet) work as a recording tool in the hands of people who have no idea what they are looking at.

 

[DMW]

I think there are two different issues being discussed here. The first is whether we know everything there is to know about European bird ID, the second is whether that information has already been published in field guides. The answer to both questions is surely no.

The article in this link gives an excellent example of gaps in our current knowledge, and how high quality photographs can provide reference material for future field guides.

 

[jurek]

I don't know about down to the millimeter scale, but there are plenty of papers out there on field estimation of whale and seal body sizes. So I would think with the right equipment and formulas it should be possible to estimate size in unrestrained wild birds.

Yes.
I also thought that geologists and construction people have lasers to measure rocks or buildings from the distance with a milimetre precision. Something similar might be modified and used for birds.

Science fiction perhaps but I've always thought that remote brain wave pattern analysis would be the ultimate id clincher - you point the the device at the creature flying by or in the field and it picks up the unique brain wave patterns and ids it ... ;-)

Brain waves are weak electricity and don't travel through the air... Which explains why there is no telepathy. Also, do brains of e.g. different warblers differ so much?

But I agree that in a near future, there should appear a fully automatic software for bird identification from photos which actually works. I would couple it with a CCTV camera on my local reserve, and set to send me a signal if a rarity pops up.

 

[THE_FERN]

Which titles have only sold in their '10's'?

Chimaira do a lot of regional, herpetological guides for anyone interested.

Publishers

www.nhbs.com

Most insect monographs. Perhaps it's over-egging to say sold in the 10s, but definitely true that they don't make back production costs. Academics still see paper as a "surer" or "more tangible" legacy than electronic.

 

[Mysticete]

Most insect monographs. Perhaps it's over-egging to say sold in the 10s, but definitely true that they don't make back production costs. Academics still see paper as a "surer" or "more tangible" legacy than electronic.

Uh...taxonomic monographs are not meant to be field guides, so this isn't really an example applicable to the thread?

 

[THE_FERN]

Uh...taxonomic monographs are not meant to be field guides, so this isn't really an example applicable to the thread?

The line between "monograph" and field guide is blurred or doesn't exist for most groups. For most insects you're talking about the "primary" literature. Equally true for plants in most diverse areas.

You might argue a "field guide" is something you can take into the field (given that there's no set content). Obviously that would include any material you like for electronic guides.

 

[THE_FERN]

Here's an example. I'd really love to take an electronic copy of Stace, the standard UK flora with me. Unfortunately, the latest ed is only available as a foot-thick book (I exaggerate but only a bit)

If you wanted to identify Odonata in South America, you'd probably resort to the relevant encyclopaedia of freshwater insects vol. It's just original taxonomic papers repackaged (and they can sell that..!)

 

[Mysticete]

The line between "monograph" and field guide is blurred or doesn't exist for most groups. For most insects you're talking about the "primary" literature. Equally true for plants in most diverse areas.

You might argue a "field guide" is something you can take into the field (given that there's no set content). Obviously that would include any material you like for electronic guides.

Yeah but that would also probably not fall under what most people would consider an actual field guide. I mean you can argue it as their is hardly a narrowly defined universal definition, but if I showed a "normal" monograph to most folks there first thought wouldn't be field guide.

 

[Zheljko]

Yeah but that would also probably not fall under what most people would consider an actual field guide. I mean you can argue it as their is hardly a narrowly defined universal definition, but if I showed a "normal" monograph to most folks there first thought wouldn't be field guide.

Depends. Our term for "field guide" is "key" because the first local book on bird ID was literally a dichotomous key used on dead birds (preferably freshly shot) and my former colleague who works with dragonflies was very grumpy when a simple photographic field guide was published by someone else, as laypeople will mis-ID dragonflies left and right with "it looks just like this one" while you need to use complicated formulas for eye angles etc. (? I guess it is like Certhia brachydactyla/familiaris situation, but with many dozens of species and often not just species pairs but quite large groups of similar species).