# Botascopia: a digital setup for generating low tech plant field guides

Simon Castellan, Aurore Alcolei, Anne Atlan, Xavier Aubriot, Mathurin Bellot, Gurvan Cabot, Lysa Dahmani, Jos Käfer, Sophie Nadot, Sara Oort, et al.

► To cite this version:

Simon Castellan, Aurore Alcolei, Anne Atlan, Xavier Aubriot, Mathurin Bellot, et al. Botascopia: a digital setup for generating low tech plant field guides. 2025. hal-05419216

HAL Id: hal-05419216

https://hal.science/hal-05419216v1

Preprint submitted on 16 Dec 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Botascopia: a digital setup for generating low tech plant field guides

Simon Castellan,ª Aurore Alcolei,ª,ᵇ Anne Atlan,ᶜ Xavier Aubriot,ᵈ Mathurin Bellot,ª,ᵉ Gurvan Cabot,ª Lysa Dahmani,ᶜ Jos Käfer,>f Sophie Nadot,ᵈ Sara Oort,>f Agnès Schermann-Legionnet, g Eric Tannierh

ªCentre Inria de l'Université de Rennes, France

ᵇLaboratoire d'Algorithmique, Complexité et Logique, Université Paris Est Créteil,
Créteil, France

ᶜEspace et Sociétés, Université de Rennes 2, France

ᵈUniversité Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Sociétés et Evolution,
91190, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.

ᵉTela Botanica, Montpellier, France

f ISEM, CNRS, IRD, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France

g Ecosystèmes, Biodiversité, Évolution, Université de Rennes, France

hCentre de Recherches Inria de Lyon, France

Corresponding author: Simon Castellan, Centre Inria de l'université de Rennes, Avenue du Général Leclerc 35042 Rennes Cedex simon.castellan@inria.fr
**Botascopia: a digital setup for generating low tech plant field guides**

**Summary.** Plant field guides are portable reference books or digital tools designed to help various users identify plant species in a given area and find out about their morphology, ecology and usage. We present Botascopia, a combination of digital tools that automatically produce low-tech field guides in the form of printed paper booklets containing species description sheets associated with an identification key. These are analogous to floras adapted to local ecosystems, such as gardens, parks, school yards or campuses. Botascopia contains a participatory knowledge base with detailed descriptions of plant species. It uses computational languages to express different perspectives on plants held by expert botanists and novice observers, for example, and the translations between them. This setup therefore offers a solution to the usual challenge of balancing precise vocabulary with making botanical knowledge accessible beyond expert communities. We tested this approach during botanical field sessions with diverse audiences, providing them with personalised, automatically generated printed booklets. This experiment explores how combining low- and high-tech approaches can contribute to the study of the relationships between technology, humans, and plants in the Anthropocene.

**Keywords.** botany, morphological traits, ecological traits, citizen science, plant identification, decision tree, education, human nature technologies relationships
# Introduction : why a digital setup for low tech usage

## Plant field guides

Plant field guides are portable tools that facilitate interaction between humans and plant communities within specific geographical areas. They usually provide a short description of plants (morphology, ecology, distribution, usages) from a given area, often along with an identification key, allowing a variety of audiences to name plants, and learn them and their ecosystems. Due to the portability requirement, they often take the shape of booklets or small books, and more recently digital apps (Farnsworth et al., 2013).

Plant field guides can be used for land managing, research or education (Silva et al. 2011; Finger et al. 2022; Winn et al. 2017), as well as to connect different social groups, children or adults, with their environment (Charvolin & Michalon 2018; Hart et al. 2023). More broadly, the use of plant field guides stands at the crossroads of contemporary global issues, such as biodiversity, technology (when they are digital, or produced with digital tools), health (because the contact with nature has often been correlated with diverse components of human and social health, including ecoanxiety, (Maller et al 2008, Heeren 2024), or education (Kuo et al 2019, Bolling et al 2019).

## Digital revolutions and their limits

Digital technologies have brought about several revolutions in the identification and description of plants (and more generally living beings) in the field (Mata-Montero and Carranza-Rojas 2016). One is the possibility to design identification keys by automatic algorithms (Pankhust 1970), allowing to generate instantaneously keys that can take years to design by hand, provided the morphological data is accessible. Another is the
invention of different types of keys, impossible to represent on a book. For example, in
"multi-access" keys, the order of questions is chosen by the user (Brach and Song 2005,
Cavalcanti et al 2024, Dallwitz et al 2002, 2018, Norton et al 2000, Yamasaki et al
2020, Kerner et al 2021, or online tools such as FloreNum). The most recent revolution
is the use of deep learning methods to identify a species from a photo (implemented in
mobile applications such as Flora Incognita, Pl@ntNet, iNaturalist). With a smartphone
connected to the internet, a name is associated to a photo with a probability, making
plant identification accessible without botanical knowledge, with fun (Jeno et al, 2017)
and with almost no time investment. Depending on the application, further information
is provided in the form of a link to Wikipedia or Wikispecies (e.g. Pl@ntNet) or directly
in the app (e.g. Flora Incognita, integrating information from Wikipedia).

These technological advances call into question the continued relevance of prin-
ted field guides, particularly those with identification keys, in today's world. Like prin-
ted dictionaries and encyclopaedias, they may appear outdated and unwieldy (Walter
and Winterton, 2007). While we recognise the potential of mobile apps to provide in-
stant, efficient and reliable (to some extent) identification, and attract and motivate a
large audience (Jeno et al., 2017), in the Botascopia project we have opted for this off-
grid approach, for the following reasons. First, using a mobile phone during a nature
activity is not always desirable, particularly for children, in a world dominated by con-
nected activities. Second, using a mobile phone for mediation does not always encour-
age a respectful relationship with the observed objects (Altrudi, 2020). Third, the con-
stant use of smartphones is not sustainable because of the pressure it puts on natural re-
sources. Fourth, internet connections and smartphones are not available everywhere. In
addition to these technological, social and prospective considerations, the use of photo-
graphs for identifying plants has limits. Photographs give a two-dimensional reduction
of the plant, omitting its three-dimensional structure. Absolute sizes, which are some-
times necessary to distinguish species, cannot be reliably estimated from photographs.
Other characteristics (such as odour, texture) are simply not visible. Using a key re-
quires from the user a type of attention that is different from taking a photo (Ernwein
and Matthey, 2019) and may have advantages in terms of education, explainability (ob-
servation is a way to explain why a name is associated to a plant) and empowerment or
conviviality (in the sense of Illich, 1973).

***Botascopia: a hybrid setup between digital and low technologies***

Botascopia is a set of digital tools that produces field guides (floras) in the form of prin-
ted paper booklets, based on a given list of plant species; this list can derive from the
inventory of a particular area, and/or correspond to a particular pedagogical project or a
specific taxon (see figure 1 for an overview). It relies on (1) a computational language
that can express plant traits and accommodate intra-individual variation (heteromorph-
ism), inter-individual variation (polymorphism) and different points of view (from ex-
perts who master botanical vocabulary to beginners who use their own words to de-
scribe a plant); (2) a participatory digital online tool for collecting reliable botanical
data, centralizing the scientific description of hundreds of flowering plant species; (3)
an algorithm for generating identification keys based on the observer's point of view; (4)
the design and editing of printed booklets containing identification keys and description
sheets (like most floras) adapted to a local plant community of interest (e.g. private or
public gardens, shared community gardens, university campuses, urban walks, school
yards, agricultural landscapes, as well as specific vegetations such as meadows, woods,
riverbanks, hedges). Booklets can also be dedicated to specific taxa or plant habits (e.g.
orchids, grasses, trees).

Here, we provide a detailed description of the different technological layers required by
this setup. We then explain how we used the booklets during several dozen botanical
field sessions with various communities of children and adults. Finally, we describe
how the setup can be used by diverse academic and non-academic communities.

The technological device

The automatic generation of field guides requires solving various technological, com-
putational or graphical problems: (i) how to organize plant traits, (ii) how to gather data,
(iii) how to generate identification keys, (iviv) how to design customised printed docu-
ments.

Organizing plant traits

A significant contribution of our work is the provision of a means to formalise the de-
scription of the morphology of any flowering plant in all its parts (stems, leaves and
flowers). This formalization, which is a kind of ontology for plants (Ilic et al., 2007) is
needed because existing ontologies or available large-scale databases of ecological or
morphological traits such as TRY (Kattge 2020) or eFLOWER (Sauquet et al 2017), tend
to be too loose in structure or focus only on sets of traits shared by a majority of plants,
and lack specific traits useful for identification.

In Botascopia the traits or characters that describe a plants can take values in the form of
predefined qualitative or quantitative values, free text, images, or URLs. These values
are organised hierarchically in a scheme written in a language that is partly described by
Castellan et al. (2023). This language is inspired by the concept of an algebraic data type
in computer science, as found in the OCaml programming language (which was also used
to program the tools; see Figure 1). The schemes are examples of ontologies (Ilic et al.,
2007) that are designed to be accessible to those without a background in computer sci-
ence and easily manipulated by a computer for analysis or conversion between different
arborescent representations. The hierarchy reflects the fact that some traits can only be
described once values have been assigned to higher-level traits. Traits states can have
multiple values (e.g. for a same species leaf blade margin can be coded as ‘entire’ and
‘lobed’) to express either intra-individual variation (heteromorphism) or inter-individual
variation (polymorphism). Heteromorphism and polymorphism are handled using probabilistic distributions over the possible values of a trait. Probabilities can also accommodate subjectivity and uncertainty in descriptions.

The decoupling of language and schemes, as well as the hierarchical nature of the language, enables a modular, evolving approach: the description language acts as a fixed metalanguage in which other languages (schemes) can be expressed. These languages can evolve and can be constantly improved and expanded. A trait or set of traits can be added without affecting the device's functionality. Consequently, even if not all morphological characters are currently included in our schemes, none are excluded in principle. The language is explicit enough so that, once they have learned the syntax, botanists can adapt and extend it in autonomy.

**Communication among schemes, and a solution to the neophyte/expert conundrum**

Several schemes can be expressed using the defined description language (Figure 1). Each scheme represents a different point of view on morphological organisation. The possibility of multiple points of view is important for identification keys because what an observer sees depends not only on the plant's organs (e.g., presence, number, size), but also on the observer's capabilities (skills and tools). For example, what an expert calls a an inflorescence may be seen by novices as a flower, which is typically the case for the flower heads of Asteraceae. From a botanical point of view, the perianth of a clematis is described as composed of sepals only; from an observer's point of view, it is viewed as composed of petal-like organs. Some traits may also be difficult to observe because they require specialist knowledge (based on trained skills in what/where to observe exactly and what to expect) or more sophisticated observation tools than magnifier glasses, so they will not be expressed in the same way in the different schemes. Questions in an identification key deal with what is observed and not necessarily with what we know is present based on external botanical knowledge.

To manipulate these schemes, we also provide a *language of translation* (Figure 1). This language makes a correspondence between two schemes, typically the botanical expert
scheme and the identification key scheme, based on traits accessible to observation in
field: the subjective experience of an observer, who may be inexperienced, is related to
the complex and rich botanical vocabulary. Achieving the right balance between the sim-
plicity of the questions and the exactitude of the vocabulary is a challenge for designers
of identification keys dedicated to non-specialists, particularly for automatic generation.
Our formalisation helps address this issue: indeed, questions and their translation from
the botanical scheme can be worked out without incidence on the source data, i.e., spe-
cies description using specialised botanical vocabulary.

Participatory database filling, the editor and the description sheets

For each species (or taxon), traits data collected in the literature (or based on personal
observation) is entered according to the scientific botanical scheme and can be modified
or verified via a dedicated website, through the Editor (Figure 2) or imported from other
databases. Currently, most of the collected data is entered manually via the editor because
we found no open-access database of plant traits that is precise and versatile enough to
support automated identification. Moreover we have a procedure of verification of data
by experts, which necessarily has a manual component.

We also transformed the process of collecting and filling data into an educational exer-
cise. From the beginning of the project, data have been manually entered during practical
courses at universities and workshops in associations. From 2021 onwards, four classes
of undergraduate and postgraduate students from Paris-Saclay University (approximately
150 students per year) have so far contributed to filling in data for the most common
flowering plants in metropolitan France. We also assigned part of the team's workload to
entering and verifying the data contributed by students or communities.

Data is shared among collections, meaning that any description of a species entered by
members of a community through their collection can be retrieved through another col-
lection if the same species is present. The database is collaborative and open to modific-
ation and enrichment by anyone with a certified account. Several mechanisms have been
designed to ensure the reliability of the data and the acknowledgement of contributors
and verifiers: all traits are associated with a bibliographic reference and the email address of the contributor; older values are stored when modifications are made; and verification is carried out separately from data entry by a two-step process of contribution/verification.

Once the description of a species is complete a description sheet can be generated (Figure 3) using a standardised form containing a selected subset of traits.

The current botanical scheme comprises around 900 morphological traits and 100 non-morphological traits, such as functional, ecological or usage information. The database currently contains information on >900 species from 44 collections, with over 100K traits in total.

## Generating identification keys

The principle of key generation has been described in part by Castellan et al. (2023). The algorithm begins with a prior distribution of plant species in the collection (uniform or based on abundance in a certain region) and evolves according to the responses to questions generated by the programme. Questions are drawn from the 'key scheme' (Figure 1), following its hierarchy, with the objective of minimizing the expected number of questions, or the global size of the key for printed versions.

Computer scientists refer to the output of the generator as decision trees (Quinlan, 1986) or as networks because several paths can lead to a species. These networks can then be explored interactively on a computer or smartphone, or fully printed on paper with a design that allows users to navigate between pages as they would with manually designed keys.

The printed version constitutes a low-tech and light in weight device that is easy to use in the field. An interactive digital version is also available, more versatile as it is possible to skip questions. The design of the printed key was carried out by professional designers with special attention to conviviality, readability (including for colour-blind readers) and the use of explanatory illustrations when appropriate (see Figure 4).
In addition to their adaptability to specific geographical areas, keys can also be adapted to a seasons, asking questions on flowers only if they are visible in a particular season for example. It is also possible to design keys allowing identification with or without questions on flowers. If both types of questions are present, it is at the cost of a bigger size of the booklet, identification being easier when flowers are present.

## The use of the booklets during botanical events

The automatically generated booklets contain identification keys and description sheets for plants found in local areas. These areas can include schoolyards, private or public gardens, campuses, urban walks and regions, as well as protected areas. These rely on plant inventories — lists of plant species found in these areas — which are established by expert botanists.

In collaboration with communities such as associations and schools, we organised several dozens botanical events in 2024 and 2025. The animation protocols were diverse. We typically selected 20–40 common species present at the event location, preferably in bloom at the time of the event, but not necessarily. Herbaceous plants are easily identified using their reproductive parts, while keys focusing on woody plants are effective without reproductive parts. This is easily explained by a greater frequency of hetero- or polymorphism on herbaceous' leaves, contrary to woody plants. The identification keys are about 5-10 pages long (booklets with in addition description sheets can have 20-30 pages). This means that identification is reached after around five questions. While this allows several features to be observed by the public, answering many questions can be tedious and often discourages users. Below 10–15 species, consulting directly all the plant descriptions or looking at the photos is faster but the observer is no longer engaged in examining plant features.

An introduction to the proper use of our booklet is always provided at the beginning, offering advices on plant observation. It also appears that participants, as long as they
are new to this process, needs a demonstration of using the key from the first page
through the different answers until they get a name and check it on fact sheets.

Booklets were then given to the participants so that they could explore the vegetation on their own and select the plants they wanted to identify. Facilitators from our team or the local community were on hand to answer questions about the identification process or the plants themselves. We observed how participants used the key to identify plants and, at the end of each event, we collected feedback on its use. In some cases, community facilitators reused the key in our absence, and several booklets are kept by communities for further use or promotional material.

We usually added a playful dimension to facilitate public engagement. For example, we organised treasure hunts where we marked some species with a number written in chalk, or on a coloured paper hanging to branches. Participants then drew a number from a box and had to find the corresponding plant, which they then had to identify and draw. This format of botanical event was more appealing for participants as it presented three types of activity (searching, identifying and drawing), which suited each participant's personality (some preferred drawing, others identifying).

Another mediation involved presenting interactions between plants and animals. By identifying a plant in the booklet and recognising its name, participants were able to associate it with a particular animal, thus receiving an introduction to ecology. Here, participants had to fill envelopes associated with plants with sheets of card presenting species (Figure 5).

These educational and promotional materials will eventually be integrated into the main
architecture of Botascopia and made available alongside the booklets, providing ready-
to-use educational kits on the website.

**Futures: The potential of Botascopia for diverse academic or non academic usages**

Botascopia offers a variety of opportunities for both academic and non-academic com-
munities. The data collected can inform research in ecology and evolution; the particip-
ating online editor can be used for teaching purposes (e.g. botanical courses at the un-
dergrad or postgrad level); the low-tech key can exemplify computer science research
that respects planetary boundaries (Steffen et al., 2015); and non-academic communities
can benefit from on-demand booklets. This section expands on these ideas.

***The potential of Botascopia in botany, ecology and evolution***

Botascopia is a resource for life scientists because it contains a large, accessible data-
base of references on plant traits and a collaborative platform for improving it. Surpris-
ingly, such a database is not available elsewhere. While digital floras are numerous,
they tend to carry descriptions in natural languages with insufficient formalisation for
quantified studies. Open databases such as TRY (Kattge et al., 2020) mostly contain
functional traits, whereas many databases used for digital keys are neither open nor ac-
cessible for research purposes.

The knowledge database comes with convenient tools for scientific use, such as im-
port/export in several formats. The syntax itself can be used independently of the data-
base to store other types of trait and benefit from the editing, importing and exporting
functions.

All values in the database are referenced with source and author information (i.e. the people who entered or imported the data). They are also tagged with a 'verified' status if they have been checked by a professional botanist.

***The potential of Botascopia for computer sciences***

Botascopia has been designed to be a convivial computational tool (Illich, 1973). According to Vetter (2018), this involves considering its impact on social relations, usability, and comprehensibility for user communities; its effect on autonomy and dependence; its interaction with living beings; and its effect on human labour and natural resources.

- On social relationships: digital technologies may sometimes create a barrier between people and their environment. Our aim is, oppositely to create artefacts using digital technologies that enable people to form direct relationships. Al-
though it is possible to use Botascopia alone without expert knowledge, we en-
courage the collective use of the booklets and the presence of an animator with
basic botanical knowledge, as this enhances relationships rather than replacing
expertise.

- In terms of usability and understandability, booklets require no additional mater-
  ials once they have been generated and printed. They do not require an electronic
device or an Internet connection. They are low-tech objects whose functioning is
not difficult to understand. While the technological nature of the booklet is debat-
able, it does contain an algorithm that is executed by humans, and could therefore
exemplify a low-tech use of digital technologies.

- On interaction with living beings: the attention and time that our device encour-
ages us to give to plants promotes a relationship based on curiosity and respect
rather than exploitation (Altrudi, 2020). Some children we interviewed, for ex-
ample, have changed their view of plants from something to be mowed in the
garden to a source of diversity.

- Human work and natural resources: any technology has an environmental impact and affects the living conditions of humans. We limit this impact by restricting computing time and promoting technologies that are self-obviating. We also hire humans to provide knowledge instead of using computing where possible.

***The potential of Botascopia for teaching and learning***

Botascopia can be used as a teaching instrument because it allows students to participate
in the data collection process and provides them with description sheets and identific-
ation keys. Although digital technologies have made information that was previously
difficult to access immediately available, thereby increasing the efficiency of plant iden-
tification, they have also reduced the time spent observing, describing and drawing
plants, which contributes to attention rather than extraction (Arpin et al., 2015; Ernwein
& Matthey, 2019). Time spent observing and learning is not wasted. Understanding
what a plant is, what makes it different from other plants and why it grows where it
does involves much more than simply naming a specimen. In this sense, we propose
digital technology that mediates a relationship with the world rather than invading hu-
man time and becoming the only environment (Ellul, 1974). Note that this type of atten-
tion differs from that targeted by the 'attention economy', in which a medium (such as a
website or TV station) tries to capture users' attention for as long as possible by offering
sensational, spectacular content and clickbaits (Citton, 2016). In future, we will relate
the device to research in plant pedagogy for students (Wynn et al. 2017).

***The potential of Botascopia for social sciences***

The design and use of Botascopia touches on several issues in the social sciences. Users' ability to learn, to focus their attention in a certain way, and to gain autonomy with this tool must be tested. From an educational science perspective, the project relates to the acquisition of experiential knowledge, which is grounded in active learning approaches and has been shown to enhance engagement, critical thinking, and practical skills through hands-on experience and reflective processes (Kolb 1984, Dewey, 1998). From a sociological perspective, the promise of a partially low-tech technology that can be appropriated by users could also be studied, aligning with research showing that user participation and appropriation are central for empowerment and social engagement. From the perspective of the history and philosophy of science, our claim to explore an original path in a direction that is not mainstream (attempting to produce tools that contribute less to acceleration and increasing energy consumption), which could be linked to an example of description of technological progress as a branching and non-linear process, emphasizing alternatives and “low-tech” developments (Jarrige 2022, Edgerton 2006).

***The potential of Botascopia for communities***

Any community, school, student, gardener or local institution can obtain a printable,
handy booklet with an attractive, user-friendly design that promotes the local flora. To
do this, a list of the species appearing in the booklet is required, and data on these spe-
cies must be present in the database. This list can be exhaustive, covering all species, or
it can be a selection of species of interest for special purposes, such as the most visible
species or those with a particular usage. Help from a trained amateur or professional
botanist is required for this phase. Once the list has been entered as a collection on the
Botascopia website, a booklet containing descriptions and an identification key can be
created, provided there is sufficient data on these species in the database. If not, training
sessions can be organised to input the necessary data. Networks of botanists can be in-
volved at each stage. These booklets can be used to promote and raise awareness of
biodiversity at a local level. They also provide information on the various uses of plants,
helping communities to understand how they have been used in the past, and which are
dangerous, for example for food, therapy or construction. Recognising the plants can
also provide insights into plants associated environment, soil, climate, pollutants and
insects, as the database includes ecological preference values.

Compared to a number of online identification keys (idbotanica, florif, naturegate, flore-
num among others), or identification keys present in floras like Flora Europea or Flora
Gallica, the Botascopia keys are adapted to the needs of a community, in space and
time. Coupled with the description sheets, the resulting light-weight floras are field
guides accessible to anyone to identify plant species easily and without prior botanical
knowledge.

**Conclusion: The Power of a Hybrid Approach**

The Botascopia setup (available at https://botascopia.inria.fr) bridges the power of digital tools with the advantages of low-tech, printed materials for field use. The system's digital architecture—including its computational language, participatory database, and key-generation algorithms — automatically and quickly generates identification keys and description sheets. This allows for the creation of local floras tailored to specific areas, such as schoolyards or parks, and adapted to different levels of expertise. Crucially, the final output—the printed paper booklet—brings several confirmed benefits: it is a lightweight, easy-to-use device in the field, requires no internet or electronic device,
and encourages a focus on observation and attention rather than digital distraction or
extraction. Furthermore, testing during botanical events confirmed that the paper book-
lets function as a collective object, fostering discussions and promoting social relation-
ships between participants and experts. The design of the booklet, the wording of the
questions, and the vocabulary used are also important factors. By combining high-tech
construction with low-tech usage, Botascopia seeks to exemplify a model of technology
that is convivial, respects planetary boundaries, and facilitates a direct, reflective rela-
tionship between humans and plants.

Acknowledgments

Will be included in post peer review versions

Data Availability Statement

Data and code is available online at [botascopia.inria.fr](http://botascopia.inria.fr) and [https://gitlab.inria.fr/botas-copia](https://gitlab.inria.fr/botas-copia) distributed under the open access licenses (GPL and ODCL, Behamou and Du-long de Rosnay 2024), with usage restrictions (Monnin et al 2023): as we put a special care to the respect of human work and environment, we request all users of all or part of our work to act in the same direction. This exclude in particular automatic data mining for learning of generative AIs, or all activities generating exploitation of humans or re-sources beyond planetary boundaries.

Conflict of Interest Statement

We declare no conflict of interest

Author contributions

Computer codes: AAlcolei, ET, GC and SC; definition of plant traits: ASL,
JK, MB, SN, SO and XA; social science monitoring: AAtlan and LD. All
authors collectively conceived the Botascopia tool and wrote the manu-
script.

References

Altrudi S. 2020 Connecting to nature through tech? The case of the iNaturalist app. **Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies**, 1-18.

Arpin, I., Mounet, C., & Geoffroy, D. 2015. Inventaires naturalistes et rééducation de l'attention: Le cas des jardiniers de Grenoble. *Études Rurales*, (195): 89-108.

Benhamou, Y., & Dulong De Rosnay, M. 2024. Open Data Commons Licenses (ODCL): Licensing Personal and Non Personal Data Supporting the Commons and Privacy. **SSRN Electronic Journal**. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4662511.

Bolling, M., Otte, C. R., el Ghoch, M., et al. (2019). The association between greenspace and prosocial behavior among children and adolescents: A systematic review. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*, 16(17), 3035.

Brach, A. R., & Song, H. 2005. ActKey: a Web-based interactive identification key program. **TAXON**, 54(4): 1041–1046.

Cardon, D. 2019. **Culture numérique**. Paris: SciencesPo les presses.

Castellan, S., Käfer, J., & Tannier, E. 2023. Back to the trees: Identifying plants with Human Intelligence. **Ninth Computing within Limits 2023**. Presented at the Ninth Computing within Limits 2023, Virtual: LIMITS. https://doi.org/10.21428/bf6fb269.265c52ce.

Cavalcanti, M. J., Santos-Silva, E. N., & Geraldes-Primeiro, L. 2024, February 2. **Free DELTA: An open-source system for processing taxonomic descriptions**. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.10863712.
Charvolin, F. 2017. Sortie nature, protocole et hybridité cognitive. Note sur les sciences participatives. **Vertigo**, (Volume 17 Numéro 3). https://doi.org/10.4000/vertigo.18684.

Charvolin, F., & Michalon, J. 2018. Folia : de la promesse technologique à l'expérience de plein air. In L. Heaton, F. Millerand, P. Dias da Silva, & S. Proulx (Eds.), *La reconfiguration du travail scientifique en biodiversité : pratiques amateurs et technologies numériques* : 105-116. Presses de l'Université de Montréal.

Citton, Y. 2017. *The ecology of attention*. (B. Norman, Tran.). Cambridge
Malden, MA: Polity.

Dallwitz, M.J., Paine, T.A. and Zurcher, E.J. 2002. *Interactive identification using the Internet. Towards a global biological information infrastructure—challenges, opportunities, synergies, and the role of entomology.*:
23-33. Technical Report no. 70, European Environment Agency.

Dallwitz, M.J., Paine, T.A. and Zurcher, E.J. 2018. *Principles of interactive keys*. https://www delta-intkey com/www/interactivekeys pdf.

Dewey, J. 1998. **Experience and education**: The 60th anniversary edition.
Kappa Delta Pi.

Edgerton D 2006 *The shock of the old*, Profile books Ltd

Ernwein, M., & Matthey, L. 2019. Events in the affective city: Affect, attention and alignment in two ordinary urban events. *Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 51*(2): 283–301.

Farnsworth EJ, Miyoko Chu, W. John Kress, Amanda K. Neill, Jason H. Best, John Pickering, Robert D. Stevenson, Gregory W. Courtney, John K. VanDyk, Aaron M. Ellison, Next-Generation Field Guides, **BioScience**, Volume 63, Issue 11, November 2013, Pages 891–899, https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.11.8

Finger, A., Groß, J., & Zabel, J. 2022. Plant Identification in the 21st Century—
What Possibilities Do Modern Identification Keys Offer for Biology Lessons?
*Education Sciences, 12*(12): 849.
Gent, D. H., Mahaffee, W. F., McRoberts, N., & Pfender, W. F. 2013. The Use and Role of Predictive Systems in Disease Management. *Annual Review of Phyto-pathology*, 51(1): 267–289.

Griffing, L. R. 2011. Who invented the dichotomous key? Richard Waller's watercolors of the herbs of Britain. *American Journal of Botany*, 98(12): 1911–1923.

Hart, A. G., Bosley, H., Hooper, C., Perry, J., Sellors-Moore, J., et al. 2023. Assessing the accuracy of free automated plant identification applications. *People and Nature*, 5(3): 929–937.

Heeren, A. (2024). *Éco-anxiété, changement climatique et santé mentale : enjeux cliniques et thérapeutiques*. De Boeck Supérieur.

Ilic, K., Kellogg, E. A., Jaiswal, P., Zapata, F., Stevens, P. F., et al. 2007. The Plant Structure Ontology, a Unified Vocabulary of Anatomy and Morphology of a Flowering Plant. *Plant Physiology*, 143(2): 587–599.

Illich, I. 1973. *Tools for conviviality*. London: Calder and Boyars.

Jarrige F 2022 *On arrête (parfois) le progrès, Histoire et décroissance, L'Échappée*, coll. "Le pas de côté"

Jeno, L. M., Grytnes, J.-A., & Vandvik, V. 2017. The effect of a mobile-application tool on biology students' motivation and achievement in species identification: A Self-Determination Theory perspective. *Computers & Education*, 107: 1–12.

Kattge, J., Bönisch, G., Díaz, S., Lavorel, S., Prentice, I. C., et al. 2020. TRY plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access. *Global Change Biology*, 26(1): 119–188.

Kerner, A., Bouquin, S., Portier, R., & Vignes Lebbe, R. 2021. The 8 Years of Existence of Xper3: State of the art and future developments of the platform. *Biodiversity Information Science and Standards*, 5: e74250.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). **Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development**. Prentice-Hall.
Latour, B. 1987. *Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society*. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University press.

Lertzman, R., Environmental Melancholia and Eco-Anxiety (2024)

Maller, C., Townsend, M., Pryor, A., Brown, P., & St Leger, L. (2008). Healthy parks, healthy people: The health benefits of contact with nature in a park context. The George Wright Forum, 26(2), 51-83.

Mata-Montero, E., & Carranza-Rojas, J. 2016. Automated Plant Species Identification: Challenges and Opportunities. In F. J. Mata & A. Pont (Eds.), *ICT for Promoting Human Development and Protecting the Environment*, vol. 481: 26-36. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Monnin A, Tannier E, Thomas M. 2023, May 17. Se réapproprier la production de connaissance - AOC media. **AOC media - Analyse Opinion Critique**. https://aoc.media/opinion/2023/05/17/se-reapproprier-la-production-de-connaissance/.

Norton Geoff A., Patterson David J., Schneider Margaret. 2000. LucID: A Multimedia Educational Tool for Identification and Diagnostics. **IJISME**, 4(1).

Pankhurst, R. J. 1970. Key Generation by Computer. **Nature**, 227(5264): 1269-1270.

Peltola, T., & Arpin, I. 2017. How We Come to Value Nature? - A Pragmatist Perspective. **Ecological Economics**, 142: 12-20.

Penev, L., Sharkey, M., Erwin, T., Van Noort, S., Buffington, M., et al. 2009. Data publication and dissemination of interactive keys under the open access model. **ZooKeys**, 21: 1-17.

Quinlan, J. R. 1986. Induction of decision trees. **Machine Learning**, 1(1): 81-106.

Saucède, T., Eléaume, M., Jossart, Q., Moreau, C., Downey, R., et al. 2021. Taxonomy 2.0: computer-aided identification tools to assist Antarctic biologists in the field and in the laboratory. **Antarctic Science**, 33(1): 39-51.
Sauquet, H., Von Balthazar, M., Magallón, S., Doyle, J. A., Endress, P. K., et al. 2017. The ancestral flower of angiosperms and its early diversification. **Nature Communications**, 8(1): 16047.

Shannon, C. E. 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. **Bell System Technical Journal**, 27(3): 379–423.

Silva, H., Pinho, R., Lopes, L., Nogueira, A. J. A., & Silveira, P. 2011. Illustrated plant identification keys: An interactive tool to learn botany. **Computers & Education**, 56(4): 969–973.

Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. **Science**, 347(6223): 1259855.

Tomlinson, B., Norton, J., Baumer, E. P. S., Pufal, M., & Raghavan, B. 2015. Self-Obviating Systems and their Application to Sustainability. **IConference 2015 Proceedings**. https://hdl.handle.net/2142/73442.

Vetter, A. 2018. The Matrix of Convivial Technology – Assessing technologies for degrowth. **Journal of Cleaner Production**, 197: 1778–1786.

Voss, E. G. 1952. The history of keys and phylogenetic trees in systematic biology. **Journal of the Scientific Laboratories of Dennison University**, 43: 1–25.

Wäldchen, J., Wittich, H. C., Rzanny, M., Fritz, A., & Mäder, P. 2022. Towards more effective identification keys: A study of people identifying plant species characters. **People and Nature**, 4(6): 1603–1615.

Walter, D. E., & Winterton, S. 2007. Keys and the Crisis in Taxonomy: Extinction or Reinvention? **Annual Review of Entomology**, 52(1): 193–208.

Wynn, A. N., Pan, I. L., Rueschhoff, E. E., Herman, M. A. B., & Archer, E. K. 2017. Student Misconceptions about Plants – A First Step in Building a Teaching Resource. **Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education**, 18(1): 18.1.40.
Yamasaki, H., Herranz, M., & Sørensen, M. V. 2020. An interactive identification key to species of Echinoderidae (Kinorhyncha). **Zoologischer Anzeiger**, 287: 14–16.

## Figure captions

Figure 1: Example of schemes parts written with the developed language. Upper left: botanical description of the floral organs, which reflects the most recent and accurate scientific knowledge. Upper right: characteristics that can be observed by a beginner. Lower middle: translation between both descriptions. This part of the translation program indicates that an observed colour may be the colour of a petal, or the colour of the corolla of a ray or tubular flowers of a head-like inflorescence.

Figure 2. Screenshots of the Editor (available on botascopia.inria.fr) partly translated in english (the Editor is currently available only in french). Left: the different sections. Right: detail of a section showing traits and the states that may be chosen. On the left-hand side, the species is indicated as unassigned, meaning that any contributor may book the species by clicking on the “modify” button, and will be the only person able to edit the form for this species. Depending on the “view” selected, all or selected fields will be shown. For example, in the “Booklet” view, only fields that are required to generate a booklet are shown.

Figure 3: Description sheets of *Medicago arabica* and *Ficaria verna* (now *Ranunculus ficaria*), but the name has not been updated yet in our taxonomic referential), as an example of how species are described in the booklets (floras) generated by Botascopia. Description sheets are currently available in French only.

Figure 4. The first two pages of an identification key (corresponding to a collection of species inventoried along the river Vilaine, in Rennes, France) at the beginning of a
booklet. It uses an algorithm to direct the reader to different pages of the booklet based on their answers to a series of questions. The key usually has around 30 pages for about 50 species. Description sheets for each species, or a selection of species, can be added to complete the booklet.

Figure 5. Some tools, audience and situations for one of the >40 botanical events organized by members of the botascopia project.

## Supplementary material

Figure S1 – Overview of the Botascopia project showing how scientists interact among disciplines and with the public. Design: Perrine Branchet (Sciences crayonnées).
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Scientific scheme

Translation 1

Translation 2

Key scheme

(with set of questions)

Generation algorithm

Key

(decision tree with questions)

Descriptiive sheet scheme

(selected information)

Template

Descriptive sheet

(illustrated description)

Page setting

Booklet

(pdf formatted for printing)
## Achillea millefolium L.

### Achillée millefeuille

This species is unassigned

MODIFY

View:

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

☐ Show only traits with unassigned value

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

### Data import/export

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

#### Morphological description

CHECK ALL

Références

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

#### Ecology

TOUT VÉRIFIER

Références

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

#### Agricultural weed:

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

oui

non

TOUT VÉRIFIER

Références

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

#### Distribution (metropolitan France) and status

TOUT VÉRIFIER

Références

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>

#### Anecdote, properties and uses

TOUT VÉRIFIER

Références

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /></figure>

#### Do not confound

TOUT VÉRIFIER

Références

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /></figure>

## Medicago arabica Huds.

### Luzerne d'Arabie

Species booked by agnes.schermann@univ-rennes.fr

MODIFY

View:

Booklet (key+sheet)

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /></figure>

☐ Show only traits with unassigned value

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>

### Data import/export

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /></figure>

#### Morphological description

CHECK ALL

Références

<figure><img src="image_22.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /></figure>

#### Life cycle and form:

CHECK ALL

<figure><img src="image_24.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_25.png" /></figure>

Type de développement:

annuelle

bisannuelle

vivace

<figure><img src="image_26.png" /></figure>

Forme de vie:

thérophyte

géophyte

hémicryptophyte

chaméphyte

phanérophyte

hydrophyte

<figure><img src="image_27.png" /></figure>

#### General aspect

TOUT VÉRIFIER

<figure><img src="image_28.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_29.png" /></figure>

#### Vegetative part

TOUT VÉRIFIER

<figure><img src="image_30.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_31.png" /></figure>

#### Reproductive part:

Plante à fleurs

autre

TOUT VÉRIFIER

<figure><img src="image_32.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_33.png" /></figure>

#### Flowers and inflorescence

TOUT VÉRIFIER

<figure><img src="image_34.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_35.png" /></figure>

Type d'inflorescence:

fleurs non réduites (cas général)

épillets
## Luzerne d'Arabie

<figure><img src="image_36.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_37.png" /><figcaption>Feuilles</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_38.png" /><figcaption>Fleur</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /><figcaption>Fruit</figcaption></figure>

Crédits photos: Didier Descouens, (), (), ().

### Floraison et fructification

<figure><img src="image_40.png" /></figure>

### Description

**PORT** Herbacée annuelle rampante ou droite puis retombante jusqu'à 65cm. Tige poillue, et cannelée.

**FEUILLES** Feuilles composées, poillues, tachetées, à dents pointues, et à long pétiole.

**FLEURS** Regroupées en capitules jaunes.

**FRUITS** Fruits secs.

**SIGNES PARTICULIERS** Feuille souvent tachée au milieu (violet-brun), terminée par une petite pointe. Fruit glabre, spiralé, d'aspect globuleux, et hérisssé d'épines.

### Écologie

**ALTITUDE** Entre de 0 à 0m et de 800 à 800m mètres d'altitude.

**HABITAT** Prairies, friches, bords de chemins, prés, champs, pelouses.

**PRÉFÉRENCES** Cette plante se trouve plutôt à la lumière et sur sols riches en bases.

### Répartition

<figure><img src="image_41.png" /></figure>

Statut de conservation Préoccupation mineure

LC

## Ficaire printanière

<figure><img src="image_42.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_43.png" /><figcaption>Feuilles</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_44.png" /><figcaption>Fleur</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_45.png" /><figcaption>Fruit</figcaption></figure>

Crédits photos: Alvalis, (), (), ().

### Floraison et fructification

<figure><img src="image_46.png" /></figure>

### Description

**PORT** Herbacée vivace droite puis retombante jusqu'à 20cm. Tige

**FEUILLES** Feuilles simples, à dents arrondies, et à long pétiole.

**FLEURS** Composées de 7, 8, 9, 10 ou plus de 11 pétales jaunes et 3 sépales jaunes ou verts. Étamines nombreuses.

**FRUITS** Fruits secs.

**SIGNES PARTICULIERS** Feuilles luisantes, cordées. Fleurs à nombre de pétales variables.

### Répartition

<figure><img src="image_47.png" /></figure>

Statut de conservation Préoccupation mineure

LC

### Écologie

**ALTITUDE** Entre de 0 à 0m et de 1600 à 1600m mètres d'altitude.

**HABITAT** Milieux frais et ombragés: Forêts feuillues, lisières forestières, vergers, haies, prairies, terrains défrichés.

**PRÉFÉRENCES** Cette plante se trouve plutôt sur sols au pH neutre.

**POLLINISATION** Par les insectes
# Bords de villaine
(Rennes)

## Promenade Alain Gerbaud

Voyez-vous des fleurs avec des pétales colorés ?

► (45 espèces)

<figure><img src="image_48.png" /></figure>

fleurs minuscules, couleurs peu marquantes ou pas de fleurs

<figure><img src="image_49.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_50.png" /></figure>

BOTASCOPIA

2

Pétales jaunes

1

Combien de pétales voyez-vous ?

► (12 espèces)

● 4

→ Page 3.A

● exactement 5 ou 10

→ Page 4

● autre (7,8,9 ou 11+)

La fleur est plutôt ...

► (4 espèces)

● plate ou légèrement creuse

<figure><img src="image_51.png" /></figure>

page 75

FICAIRE PRINTANIÈRE

● en forme de pompon

<figure><img src="image_52.png" /></figure>

Voyez-vous des feuilles connectées au ras du sol ?

► (3 espèces)

Feuilles souvent disposées en cercle (rosettes)

● Je vois des feuilles au ras du sol

<figure><img src="image_53.png" /></figure>

→ Page 9.A

● Je vois des feuilles seulement sur la tige

Quelle est l'allure générale des feuilles de la tige ?

► (3 espèces)

● entières ou légèrement dentées

<figure><img src="image_54.png" /></figure>

page 87

LUZERNE D'ARABIE

● découpées ou lobées

<figure><img src="image_55.png" /></figure>

→ Page 10.A
<figure><img src="image_56.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_57.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_58.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_59.png" /></figure>