The data quality assessment is a summary of an observation's accuracy. All
observations start as "casual" grade, and achieve
"research" grade when
-
the iNat community agrees with the observer's ID, where an "agreeing"
identification is one that matches exactly or is of a child taxon of the
observer's ID. For example, if Scott says it's a mammal and Ken-ichi
says it's Homo sapiens, then Ken-ichi agrees with Scott.
- the observation has a date
- the observation is georeferenced (i.e. has lat/lon coordinates)
- the observation has a photo
Observations will revert to "casual" grade if the above conditions aren't met or
- the community agrees the location doesn't looks accurate (e.g. monkeys in the middle of the ocean, hippos in office buildings, etc.)
- the community agrees the organism isn't wild/naturalized (e.g. captive or cultivated by humans or intelligent spac
Comments & Identifications
Note the dusky toe tips, which are characteristic of _mucosa_ rather than _boylii_.
You may be right, I don't know enough about the morphology to say for sure, but this is WAY out of range for R. muscosa, at least given the IUCN range and the range description on AmphibiaWeb. Check out the HerpNET / BerkeleyMapper range too.
Add a comment
Add an identification