Andrena key in Identikit, a trial

The key: Identikit key: Select Andrena Examples
This is NOT a useful diagnostic resource. It is a proof-of-concept experiment with Identikit software, a possible alternative to the xml-based interactive keys of DiscoverLife. I've populated it with an arbitrary set of 7 taxa, and a subset of characters used in the DiscoverLife Andrena key.

You can consult dichotomous keys in the primary literature, which are spread among many hard-to-access publications (that may be out of date), and rife with complicated terminology and comparisons to exemplars that you do not have in a collection. This is the conservative path, but impractical for most.

Or you can use the key in DiscoverLife, which is far friendlier to non-specialists. Criticially, it is interactive, so that a diagnosis does not hinge on a correct call for each step of a dichotomous key. The design favors plain English, and descriptive illustrations and photos. In most cases, species pages have specimen photos and detailed descriptions from primary literature, and distribution maps. The DL Andrena key does have flaws, to be expected in a resource attempting to accurately discriminate among >500 US species. But at the moment, it is probably the best first step to get at least close to ID.

However, the software behind the DL keys is suboptimal. To get a sense of what I mean, compare the
Osmia key from DL,
to a much more elegant interface in the Osmia key from ExoticBeeID*. The latter is cleaner, more efficient and intuitive, and offers trait and specimen images at hi res. A down side: it uses Lucid software, which is expensive. In my sample Andrena key, I've used Identikit, which is open source and free. A long term goal would be to move keys like DL's to this kind of platform.

The DL authors - I've discussed with Sam Droege and Clare Maffei - are amenable to a new kind of deployment. There are a couple of impediments. The most obvious is that re-formatting a key with 520 taxa and 100 traits would be a crazy amount of work. A second problem is about the long term - the current xml-based platform is somewhat future-proofed, maintained by USGS, on a stable server space. Identikit software is written in javascript and deployed on github. What would be needed to assure its performance as software evolves and bugs come up? I don't know, but I am scouting for info on this.

If you have read this far (all 3 of you), my current take on this: Keys like Identikit or Lucid will win out over older formats, sooner or later. I can generate such keys, and I likely will for a bee genus without the mountain of data in the DL Andrena key. I am also interested in using this software for any other taxon where I have enough information and imagery to do a credible job. I've done this for the draft Ceratina of the Pacific Northwest. A reach, but worth contemplating: Andrena subgenus, perhaps based on the subset represented in OR/WA specimens in hand (collections of Quamash EcoResearch and Institute for Applied Ecology), and in other material I can get from the Eastern Ecological Science Center (Sam Droege, Clare Maffei) or other projects. Stay tuned.

• Neither key is anywhere near complete--there are ~150 species of Osmia in the US. Exotic bee ID is limited in scope, with 29 species. DL is getting closer to comprehensive in a draft version of the key, with 131 species, which incorporates western species.

Posted on December 15, 2022 06:35 PM by cappaert