Development of a common insect catalog website

  A couple of news items
Finally, I received a signal from another programmer that everything is ready for integrating Google Maps to put points of view finds on the map. We'll launch it soon enough. Once again, "that look"...

There was an idea to fix the possibility of combining third-party projects dedicated to butterflies and the system / engine Lepidoptera.ru. For example, if a person is engaged in a project that interests them (an example out of thin air is a butterfly detector for a particular area), they will be able to implement it not on a separate resource, but on a website Lepidoptera.ru. At the same time, on the one hand, he will be the full owner of the project (he said "for football", so for football), in case of participation of other users, he will have an advantage over them, the right to veto, etc., and on the other hand, the project will be fully integrated with the gallery and catalog of the site so that it is not necessary it will turn all this back from scratch.

See how this is implemented on http://www.lifedesks.org/
Register a website there and see the filling.

maybe I didn't quite understand the principle of operation, but it's not very convenient for me to work alphabetically, (prichom for families with Russian names - Russian in front, and Latin in which they are placed-in parentheses behind) and not in phylogenetic order, maybe you can come up with a sequence switch, such as on ZINA, there is an alphabet, there is the system?

About the Russian name ahead - now corrected, the Russian name is generally removed from the link and is now side by side in a modest gray color, i.e. it should no longer interfere.
Regarding alphabetical and non-alphabetical sorting — technically, nothing prevents you from making such a switch, but now the phylogenetic sorting is not yet ready on the site (i.e., the corresponding values for taxa are not set). After the classification update, the radio button should also appear on the site (see above). By the 15th, unfortunately, I didn't have time, because there was even more work there than I expected, but the process is underway, I'll finish it soon...

This post was edited by Asar - 22.09.2011 00: 01

See how this is implemented on http://www.lifedesks.org/
Register a website there and see the filling.

Thanks for the tip, this is an interesting resource. But there, as far as I understood, after looking at the admin part, standard functionality is offered (i.e. there is some common software part, the engine), which the project administrator can use.
I'm dancing for someone else. Namely: on the site Lepidoptera.ru there is a common catalog and gallery part with which you can synchronize your project on the site (namely, synchronize with data, and not use the engine). At the same time, I program/create for each curator of the project what he needs (a typical example is an online determinant with a polytomic key).
As a result, we get a separate identifier developed within the site, which, for example, can refer to descriptions of species and photos available in the general catalog.
In other words, if there are a dozen projects that differ from each other in functionality, I will program a dozen different versions of prog, and I will work with each curator individually.

This post was edited by Asar - 22.09.2011 00: 21

For the "Russian" thank you so much!
"Ideally, "it would be nice to have a" similar species " field on a page with a separate view, such as the "Eastern European Day Butterflies" field - this will make it much easier to identify, especially given that almost every species has several photos from different angles.
Huge respect to developers! A good, useful and dynamically developing resource!

do you need to enter your password every time? or is there a way to stay logged in?

"Ideally, "it would be nice to have a"similar views" field on a page with a separate view

Yes, there will be such a field. Although people are right who say that the concept of similarity will be noticeably different from those who judge, nevertheless, I think the field will be useful. Let's see if this is true in practice.

do you need to enter your password every time? or is there a way to stay logged in?

Currently, it can only be saved using the browser (i.e. you will only need to click the login button, and the username and password will immediately hang in the corresponding windows). Permanent cookies should also be made, this has been in the plans for a long time, but now all the time is spent on global updating of the database of species / super-species taxa and on ongoing work on updating the site.
Summary: there will be, but later.

Now all information for species descriptions, including subspecies, is entered by thematic subsections (Distribution, Time of summer, etc.) with the user's mandatory indication of who entered the information and the source from which he took it. Data entered earlier will gradually be converted to this new format, and all new information is accepted only in it.
This information is used to fill in data for formalized attributes, including similar types.

http://lepidoptera.pro

is it a clone?

  http://lepidoptera.pro

is it a clone?

No, it seems to be an automated English mirror...

Yes, this is the English version of the site. Although not everything has been translated from Russian to English yet, we are trying our best...

ok

If you are an Apollo, and even a democrat, then you live in the Middle Urals

http://lepidoptera.ru/species/parnassius-apollo/
The subspecies democratus lives in the Middle Urals

The site has been updated to use a more appropriate classification. During the synchronization of databases, glitches could occur (such as urticaria flew to the hawkmoth). If someone notices something so glyukavoe-please report, pliz, in the comments on the site (if there are registered users) or in this topic on the forum (if not registered users).

In April-May, I will order a new software engine of the site, which will fix many of the shortcomings of the old one (slowness of some sections, insufficient functionality of the interactive part, glitches with copies of already uploaded comments, etc.) From major additions — maps with the Google Maps engine will finally appear, where you can put down points for catching and shooting butterflies, linking them to views and photos on the site. If anyone has any suggestions for the software functionality of the site, please state them in this topic, on the site, in the BOS or in the mail.

Good afternoon!
There is a comment-a wish for the site to work in IE8. Some images are displayed with distorted colors. I do not know what this is related to, because I do not understand anything about site construction. But here are the printscreens of one page in IE and Firefox for comparison:


Also, it's not great to use scrolling of internal windows, if I call it that correctly. Especially many scrolls appear again in IE:


Such considerations... If the site's operation in IE is not essential, just ignore my message, but many people still use this file explorer due to various circumstances.

feniks, this color byaka occurs in my opinion only with your system. No one sets up computers remotely here
Here is my screen for comparison from under IE8 (you don't need another one), figure it out.
UPD: I changed the screen to make it clear that I have" piggy " (XP).

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 13.04.2012 13: 07

Pictures:

pic_8.jpg — (145.34к)

Thank you for your feedback.

Some images are displayed with distorted colors.

Yes, there is such a problem. It is not found in all cases of using IE (and, as far as I remember, only in version 8), but sometimes it is. Unfortunately, neither I nor anyone else has been able to solve it yet. But thanks for the reminder, I'll try again. Or let's try to generate photos differently in the new version
. P. S. Although this is a glitch of the browser, and not the site (based on discussions of such a problem on the Web), along with the site reform, there is an idea to re-generate Zhpegi...
P. S. S. By the way, in Chrome, too, not everything is smooth — there these photos can generally don't show up.

Also, it's not great to use scrolling of internal windows, if I call it that correctly. Especially many scrolls appear again in IE:

In general, internal scrolling is enabled only if the content does not fit into the block. And in IE, too (now I can only check in version 9, but this property also worked fine in 6). It is strange that you do not process it, and scrolling is always enabled, and not just when necessary. We'll have a look...

If the site's performance in IE is not essential, just ignore my message, but many people still use this file explorer due to various circumstances.

The site's performance in IE is, of course, essential — it's too popular to ignore. Maybe I'll update the site's design along with the engine, and then some of the problems I mentioned (but not the bluish photos) will be fixed.

This post was edited by Asar - 13.04.2012 13: 22

Yes, it doesn't bother me at all, I almost don't use IE. It's just that no other sites have ever experienced such distortion, which means that something is being implemented on them in a different way. By the way, I looked at this page on 3 other computers. Overall score 3: 2 in favor of the right color (considering your printscreen))))

Yes, it doesn't bother me at all, I almost don't use IE. It's just that no other sites have ever experienced such distortion, which means that something is being implemented on them in a different way. By the way, I looked at this page on 3 other computers. Overall score 3: 2 in favor of the right color (considering your printscreen))))

Yes, I just have it from three browsers without such problems: IE, Opera, Mozilla Firefox.
The main one, of course, is Opera

Vasily, you do not have IE version 8, do I understand correctly?

Vasily, this doesn't seem to be related to the operating system. I have W7 on my laptop, as well as on the main computer. So there the color is correct (also IE8). In general, something tells me-it's better not to bother with this problem))) I shouldn't have raised this wave)))

Vasily, you do not have IE version 8, do I understand correctly?

Peter, the real "eight". True, the XP axis and the"like a Swiss watch" system

Pictures:

pic_9.jpg — (81.87к)

That's all, I figured it out, it seems. It's good that this topic was raised :-- )
Images that were run through batch processing in one of the programs before publishing are displayed with glitches (and in Chrome they are not displayed at all). Apparently, she wrote in an imperfect standard ZHPEG, which some browsers do not process normally. Now this processing is no longer used (so the last few thousand photos in the gallery are shown without glitches-check), so newly uploaded photos are displayed normally, and I will additionally deal with the old glitches by remaking them in a new format.

It seems that after the next update in Chrome, the glitch is fixed. I don't know about IE. Anyone who had glitches with the images, please check if everything is OK.
Example of a page where a large photo in case of a glitch will be cyanotic or completely absent:
http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/16221

A new section of author's projects has been added to the site. The idea is as follows:
Let's say there is an author of a certain work that he would like to arrange and publish on the Web. For example, a polytomic determinant or some other catalog. They can do this on their own website. Or maybe not on your own, but on the Lepidoptera.ru (of course, if the work concerns butterflies).
Advantages of this option:
— You don't need to program anything or know/do anything related to site construction at all.
— You don't need to build your own system from scratch, the project automatically syncs with the one that is on the site. If necessary, the author can correct/supplement it at his own discretion for his project.
— Similar situation with illustrations.
- It can be adapted to the English version without any extra effort.
Disadvantages:
- Site dependency. The site is being covered Lepidoptera.ru, the project is also covered. But. First of all, you can always fix the possibility of backup, so that the author does not remain empty-handed even in the event of earthquakes. Secondly, as part of their project on the site, the author gets maximum freedom — that is, he has more rights than the admin and in general than anyone else.
Well, a plus for the site will be additional useful thematic material.

As an example, the Stas Korb micro-detector is embedded http://lepidoptera.ru/projects. It has never been polytomic and is simply small, plus it will sync with the database only after all RF views get into it. But a living example is better than an inanimate one.

Accordingly, if anyone has a desire to publish such projects or who gets their own static site with a bunch of unnecessary manual work-well, write to this topic, to the site or to my email main#lepidoptera.ru (a dog instead of a bug).

This post was edited by Asar - 10.06.2012 19: 11

As an example, the Stas Korb micro-detector is embedded http://lepidoptera.ru/projects.

... well, yes, only if we distinguish subgenera, then the" subgenus Maculinea of the genus Phengaris " logically consists of one species: alcon. Otherwise, all meaning is lost, because " Phengaris s. str." they fall between alcon and everything else...

I apologize for the offtopic.

... well, yes, only if we distinguish subgenera, then the" subgenus Maculinea of the genus Phengaris " logically consists of one species: alcon. Otherwise, all meaning is lost, because " Phengaris s. str." they fall between alcon and everything else...

I apologize for the offtopic.

I wonder what kind of logic this is. Could you explain your position in detail, so to speak?
Or, following your logic, do you give each individual species its own subgenus/genus? Even Hennig's cladistics didn't reach this point

I wonder what kind of logic this is. Could you explain your position in detail, so to speak?
Or, following your logic, do you give each individual species its own subgenus/genus? Not even Hennig's kladistics department has reached this point

I explain, so to speak, in detail.

1) The Korb catalog, Bolshakov, 2011 says: "the genus system (Phengaris-E. K.) is accepted on the basis of the work of Fric et al., 2007". The subgenus Maculinea is distinguished, which includes ALL species of the former USSR.

2) In Fric et al., 2007, no subgenera are distinguished; four groups of species are distinguished: P. alcon group (Maculinea van Eecke, 1915), P. atroguttata group (Phengaris s.str.), P. teleius group, and P. arion group. This is done on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of morphological and molecular features. The above cladograms show that the alkon is basal in relation to all other species.

3) That is, if we accept the Frick system, then it is incorrect to combine all the species of the former USSR into one subgenus (it is assumed that the species Phengaris s. str. fall into the nominative subgenus). Based on the IMHO Freak, you can distinguish, for example, two subgenera: Maculinea with one alcon species and nominative with all the others; or three subgenera: Maculinea with one alcon species, nominative (oriental Phengaris s.str.) and one more (remaining); or four: namely, groups of species from the work The freak. You can also not formally allocate anything - which is exactly what Frick did.

Of course, no one forbids you to criticize the Frick system and offer your own based on your data, but why then refer to the Frick?

In addition to the selection by European countries, the catalog now has the ability to select species by Russian regions. Division into regions — according to Blue, 2008. In addition, you can now select not only for families, but also for any taxa, starting from the genus and up. Other catalog attributes (summer time, size, and color) can be used in conjunction with selections by country or region, but please note that they are not assigned to all types (summer time, size, and color).
Summary: it is possible to deduce, for example, all representatives of Noctuinae living simultaneously in Belarus, as well as in the European Central and Middle Volga regions of Russia:

Or you can still have them, but only with the presence of yellow in the color and flying in July (the sample is less accurate, because the signs "color" and "time of summer" are not yet indicated for all species, but still):

Information about which region represents which regions and other administrative territories is available on the same catalog page.

This post was edited by Asar-08.07.2012 23: 35

A couple of days ago, the system for adding text information about types (descriptions) to the site became available to all registered users of the site. This system was discussed in detail at one time in the topic http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtopic=483245
Here I will briefly describe the meaning:
The view description page, among other things, has 4 large sections:

1. "Formal" attributes. It displays abbreviated data that allows you to quickly view the view, as well as search for views on the site and make selections in the catalog. For example, the name, synonyms, countries / regions of distribution, time of summer (specific months) , etc. This data can only be changed by admins and moderators.

2. Expanded data indicating the sources. Here you can find detailed information in free form, with a mandatory indication of the source, as well as the user who entered the data on the site. At the same time, all data is divided into subsections (see the link to the topic above). Based on this section, attribute values are assigned for section #1. Currently, all registered users of the site can add this data.

3. Short description. Here you can enter several significant / striking properties of the view, i.e. this is an even shorter description than in section #1. This field is filled in only by the admin/moderators, and it is currently not filled in for most views.

4. Comments. Everything that doesn't fit into section # 2 is written here about the view. That is, questions/discussions rather than statements. Of course, all registered users can add comments.

Due to the fact that the site went through several stages of development, during each of which the information was entered somewhat differently, some rudiments can be found on the pages of species, such as: the "Old Description" section is a description of a species with one of the old versions. Gradually, I move all the information from there to section #2, and delete the old descriptions. But not everything has been moved yet. Similarly, information is transferred from old user comments to section # 2 (and then, if necessary, to # 1). In addition, in the field" Forage plants " in formal attributes, plants are often displayed in free form (i.e., as in section 2), and not just their Latin names. As soon as I move everything to the new system, it will be possible to search for species by forage plants, and links from plant names to their descriptions on the friendly Plantarium site will also work.
However, all this purge is up to me, and it is now in full swing. The point of the updated system is to allow the whole world to come together and at the same time maintain a good ratio of the amount of information (because all users can enter it) and its quality (because without information about the sources and who brought the information to the site, data cannot be entered).

Accordingly, who will be sad in the fall/winter, there will be time and party consciousness-you are welcome to test and use the whole thing.

This post was edited by Asar - 06.11.2012 16: 35

Well, yes, in addition to this system, there are a couple of new things:
In August, we appeared on Twitter (link in the upper-right corner on each page of the site).
All blog posts are tagged to make it easier for fans of butterfly music to search for music, and for lovers of sex tours in Thailand-information about butterflies in Thailand.
Search is now more fun working with synonyms than before.
Photographers can link photos of the same individual to each other. Accordingly, it is always easy to jump from one of the photos of an individual (not a species, but an individual) to others.
When uploading photos in archives, starting from the beginning of September, you can upload archives with subfolders.
Minor glitches have been fixed.
Added new species and synonyms, information about forage plants, and more than a thousand photos.

If someone who recently registered didn't receive a password, please send me an email main#lepidoptera.ru from the address to which you registered your account, I will send it (password) by hand. Now I have re-sent passwords to everyone who regan recently, but never went under all accom.
P. S. There were glitches when the password might not come after registration. Now fixed.

Haven't visited the site for a long time (lepidoptera.ru), saw some changes, and was pleased that a certain number of new species were added to the catocal list (now about a quarter of all species of this genus are on the list). While the terrible classification of bears (meaning the division into tribes, genera), most of the taxa are missing.

Sergey, thank you for your feedback.
My comments:
By the number of taxa: currently there are most Russian and most European ones. In a week or two, the total number of taxa will be increased approximately twice (now an update of the database is being prepared), but first of all, exotics will be counted. If I'm wrong somewhere, and the site has a global attack of euro and ru-types, please clarify.
By classification:
A) There are a lot of classification options, and there will always be dissatisfied with any of them
B) To choose an adequate classification option, it's very good when there is a narrow specialist for a group who inserts his own weighty one, and whose opinion on this group is the main
one. You can wait for specialists for years, so when compiling a taxon tree on the site, I proceed from the next one:
- Use of sources that are not the most ancient and not the most frostbitten (for example, I refer the same Fauna Europea to those that are not the most ancient and not the most frostbitten).
- Voicing sources to make it clear which system is used for classifying a particular taxon.
- The ability to search for the desired taxon by users who do not agree with the classification on the site (the system of synonyms and alternative generic combinations is used in the search along with the main names for the site).
- The ability to create an alternative "user" system through the Projects section (although there are no people willing to use it yet).
- Operational changes to the taxon tree on the site in case of making appropriate amendments by specialists.

In short: as long as there is no permanent staff of specialists for all groups, a certain ideal classification on the site is a utopia. It should not be ideal, but clear (where and why it came from in general) and convenient for search by adherents of any other options, as well as easily customizable, both for the entire site and for the entire site. for individual user options.

P.S. Now the approach is as follows:
Above the tribes — in most cases made in accordance with Fauna Europea.
Under tribes — for other species, in most cases based on the same Fauna. For ru-types - by Blue. When crossing the Euro and the Ruins and Fauna (with some exceptions).
Plus, in the beginning, the Euro checklist was used, but now it is almost completely replaced by Fauna (which, however, is not surprising if you look at their editors).
Well, yes, if someone can serve as the same specialist with their own weighty - traditionally, a well-comer.

This post was edited by Asar - 12/13/2012 17: 25

Peter, in my opinion, it is best to focus on the bears on Dubotolova and his catalog. And there are a lot of catocal taxa missing, about 40% of Eurasian and almost all North American taxa. But progress on the face! A year ago I wanted to add photos of some of our seaside (musmi, kochubeya, moltrekhti), so they were not in the list of species. Now there is, hands will reach gradually I will start to put pictures. I have about 100 types of catocals in my collection, which is certainly not a lot, but I'm working on adding

I've just reviewed my draft. In the new version, which I promised to launch in a week or two, there are a little more than 200 types of catocals (so far only 59 are available on the site). However, they haven't been processed yet, and some of them may become duplicates/synonyms...
I understood with Dubotolov - I will look at it after the update, if necessary, I will additionally edit it.

This post was edited by Asar - 12/13/2012 22: 05

A must-watch video to cheer up all and sundry butterfly catchers. The dudes played really well. http://lepidoptera.ru/community/11519

This post was edited by Asar - 12/29/2012 23: 53

In a week or two, the total number of taxa will be increased approximately twice

After a week or two, it didn't work out, but now it's ready. Now we have ~76,000 butterfly species in the catalog and more than 30,000 subspecies. There are also more supraspecific taxa. And synonyms, too. In addition, many glitches and inaccuracies in the old database were fixed. And yes, sdi, katokal also became more :-- ) Now there are 249 of them.
For photographers: I've only been working on the final part of the update process for the last 10 days, and I haven't published any newly uploaded photos. I'll publish everything soon and link it to the new database.
Masochists: if someone can run through their favorite group on the site and check it for at least obvious errors - it will be just awesome.
Everyone: if anyone notices any errors or inaccuracies in the new database , please let them know. Although I checked everything in several passes, but the volume is horse-like, and my knowledge is not at all. So there may be mistakes and simple omissions.
New updates on synonyms, local names, geography, and forage plants are coming soon.

This post was edited by Asar - 03.01.2013 23: 37

Everyone: if anyone notices any errors or inaccuracies in the new database , please let them know. Although I checked everything in several passes, but the volume is horse-like, and my knowledge is not at all. So there may be mistakes and simple omissions.

I decided to look at 2 of my "favorite" bands recently, in case you found something new-this is Leptidea and Euphydryas. And I was upset for you. It's not even yesterday, but the level of the early 00s. Well, it is impossible to make daytime butterflies according to Chikalovets and the Catalog of Lepidoptera of Russia!