Page 3 of 3

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 11:14 am
by Jeroen Speybroeck
C'mon fieldherping.eu members, nearly 2/3 of these are mine, we can do better! :P :mrgreen: :ugeek:

Most of the species in the latest bar plot have very restricted ranges, so of course the number of records is low. For instance, I'd care more about lacking data for more widespread species from a certain country, like not having a single record of quatuorlineata for Montenegro (just an example!) than try to get 100 levendis records. Obviously, you're not trying to do the latter, but you get the idea.

In contrast, the number of records of certain species in that plot is indeed low - Rana arvalis, Triturus carnifex, Iberolacerta horvathi, ...

Bero should have some Rana arvalis spots. Did you ask for structural contributions from the national herp societies? Surely, there's data for arvalis in Slovenia and Croatia. And many more species, for sure.

From the latest graph, I deduce that Peter Oefinger could still add some spots. Lizards, but also Kastellorizo Lyciasalamandra luschani.

I think forum member Yannick Francioli posted a Slovenian aspis here at some point in time...

Why is Eumeces schneideri in this list? Is Cyprus included? If yes, does that mean you have more than 8 records of all Cypriotic species, including Hierophis cypriensis? Or does this species occur on some other island?

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:27 pm
by Ilian Velikov
BTW, I just noticed that the last records I imported are shown in red on the map while all the rest are yellow. What is this supposed to mean? Is there any problem with them?

Jeroen Speybroeck wrote:like not having a single record of quatuorlineata for Montenegro (just an example!)


How do you see which record corresponds to which species? I don't have a species name when I select my records...or is this some sort of limited function that I don't have access to?

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:54 pm
by Berislav Horvatic
Bero should have some Rana arvalis spots.

I've seen thousands of Rana arvalis, in the surroundings of Zagreb, as all of you may know from my previous
postings.
As an amateur in herpetology, I just decided to wait for the relevant local professionals & institutions to
react. So far, they haven't. Rana arvalis, ZERO points. "NONEXISTENT" in the Balkan region!?
Regarding Rana latastei, there has been a TEAM of professional biologists researching them in Istria, some
"internal reports", at least a BA thesis, maybe an MSc. thesis, maybe even (in spe) a Ph. D. thesis. So, why
should I, a humble amateur, not at all involved in that particular research, react?
Regarding Vipera aspis in Slovenia, I'd say the Slovenes should react, not me. I've never seen a single one.
(I mean, V. aspis, not Slovenes...)
YES, if it's not too late, I'll be happy to help, but what about the professionals & institutions...? They have
e-mail addresses, web pages, ... and normally do not participate in friendly correspondence on a webpage
like this one... That's a fact.

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:21 pm
by Berislav Horvatic
Well, I've just reminded/alerted the "professionals & institutions" in Croatia and Slovenia
of their sacred vocation, so let's just wait and see...

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:09 pm
by Berislav Horvatic
Good news from the Croatian herpetological society "Hyla": "We're in e-mail contact with them, and
will send them "a certain set of data, at least our own, next week." Very good news, indeed.
Let's hope for the same response from the Slovenes... especially regarding Vipera aspis, of course.

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:14 pm
by Edvard Mizsei
Berislav Horvatic wrote:but what about the professionals & institutions...?

We have contacted nearly everybody working on the Balkan Peninsula. We have positive reply from all countries. We asked these collaborators to submit their data by the end of year, which will really boost the database. The only exception is Slovenia, which is still silent.

Fieldherpers are not the fundamental data source of the project, but this project is an opportunity to give back something to the ecosystem, useful data to assist it's protection.

Ilian Velikov wrote:How do you see which record corresponds to which species? I don't have a species name when I select my records

As maintainer and admin I can see all records with species name on the webpage. To do analyses we have connection to the database from R and QGIS too.

You should see your records, when you select them and below the map there is a Display option "Compact table". If the "Species_code" column is empty, please write me. Do you see your observations in different colour?

Jeroen Speybroeck wrote:Why is Eumeces schneideri in this list? Is Cyprus included?

Cyprus not included. I have to check the Eumeces...

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:43 pm
by Kevin Byrnes
Jeroen Speybroeck wrote: like not having a single record of quatuorlineata for Montenegro (just an example!)

That's strange, I thought I had submitted my quatuorlineata record from Montenegro.

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:02 pm
by Edvard Mizsei
Kevin Byrnes wrote:
Jeroen Speybroeck wrote: like not having a single record of quatuorlineata for Montenegro (just an example!)

That's strange, I thought I had submitted my quatuorlineata record from Montenegro.


There are 35 records of Elaphe quatuorlineata from Montenegro in the database. It was an "example" by Jeroen. (but anyways, no too many...)

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:05 am
by Jeroen Speybroeck
Kevin Byrnes wrote:
Jeroen Speybroeck wrote: like not having a single record of quatuorlineata for Montenegro (just an example!)

That's strange, I thought I had submitted my quatuorlineata record from Montenegro.


It was indeed a fictitious example.

Re: Balkan Herps project

PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:11 pm
by Edvard Mizsei
Last week the Balkan Herps database received 1711 records, now we have 17342 records. However some species still poorly represented. (We know after revising taxonomy these number will change.)

Image

Since today, only our project members able to see exact locations. Visitors can see records snapped to a grid, there is around 10 km inaccuracy on the map. Species data still absent for unregistered users because of conservation reasons.
Image