More than a Bit of Fun: The Multiple Outcomes of a Bioblitz

Abstract

Bioblitzes are a popular approach to engage people and collect biodiversity data. Despite this, few studies have actually evaluated the multiple outcomes of bioblitz activities. We used a systematic review, an analysis of data from more than 1000 bioblitzes, and a detailed analysis of one specific bioblitz to inform our inquiry. We evaluated five possible bioblitz outcomes, which were creating a species inventory, engaging people in biological recording, enhancing learning about nature, discovering a species new to an area, and promoting an organization. We conclude that bioblitzes are diverse but overall effective at their aims and have advantages over unstructured biodiversity recording. We demonstrate for the first time that bioblitzes increase the recording activity of the participants for several months after the event. In addition, we provide evidence that bioblitzes are effective at bringing people and organizations together to build communities of professionals and amateurs, critical for conserving and protecting biodiversity.

Keywords: Bioblitz; engagement; iNaturalist; invasive alien species; species inventory.

Figure 1.

Word cloud of 1860 descriptions of iNaturalist projects with bioblitz in their title conducted between 2013 and 2020. Bioblitzes are usually pitched as fun challenges in which everyone can participate to help observe wildlife and nature by finding or documenting as many species as possible in a certain area either a city or park by, in this case, using the iNaturalist app.

Figure 2.

The distribution of iNaturalist bioblitz projects between 2013 and 2020 (N = 1836). This map uses a Mollweide equal-area map projection.

Figure 3.

Fifty-nine published accounts on bioblitzes were screened for the five most common aims for running a bioblitz after which, for each of the publications, the aims were ranked in accordance to their importance ranging between 1 for the aim with the lowest importance and 5 for the aim with the highest importance. The following five aims were scored: inventory (i.e., creating a biodiversity inventory), learning (i.e., improving knowledge of the participants), new species (i.e., discovering new species to an area), promotion (i.e., promoting an organization), and public engagement. Either inventory or public engagement was found to be the most important aim (scores of 5) in 90% of the publications, whereas the promotion of an organization was the lowest ranked aim (scores of 1) in most of the publications.

Figure 4.

Bioblitzes trigger increased participant activity with biological recording that lasts for several weeks after the bioblitz. The difference of recording activity in days per week for 3378 recorders from 100 bioblitzes 1 year before and 1 year after the bioblitz they participated in. The y-axis shows the difference in the number of recording days per week compared with the same week in the year preceding the bioblitzes (enlarged on left). Values range between −7 (i.e., if a person recorded 7 days less in the year after the bioblitz) and 7 (i.e., if a person recorded 7 days more in the year after the bioblitz) however points are jittered to make them visible. The line is fitted with a nonlinear exponential model. Pre- and postbioblitz activity were compared each week to remove any seasonal effects of recording activity and we compared recording activity expressed as the weekly devoted days rather than number of observations to help remove differences related to species abundances.

Figure 5.

The Akrotiri bioblitz observer–identifier network was constructed using iNaturalist data on the participants engaged in the Akrotiri bioblitz (box 3) that were making observations (“observers,” the black nodes), doing identifications (“identifiers,” the blue nodes) or both (the orange nodes), and the Gephi software for the visualization (Bastian et al. 2009). The size of the nodes is proportional to the number of identifications someone did. The observer–identifier network shows that bioblitzes have the potential to engage an audience beyond the bioblitz participants by using digital platforms such as iNaturalist. Many people (blue nodes) got engaged in the Akrotiri bioblitz by identifying the records made during the bioblitz by the observers. The identifiers in the center, the bigger blue nodes in the network, engage with multiple records from the bioblitz whereas the small peripheral blue nodes are identifiers that helped in the identification of just one record.