Received: 6 June 2023
| Revised: 5 November 2023
DOI: 10.1111/aec.13459
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Comparing different citizen science platforms for
collecting urban ecological data from Toco toucan
(Ramphastos toco) in Argentina
Alejandro A. Schaaf1 | Laura M. Haag1 | Noelia V. Gonzalez Baffa-Trasci1 |
Agustina Yapura | Natalia Chocobar | Sol A. Caldano | Román A. Ruggera1,2
2 2
1
Instituto de Ecorregiones Andinas
(CONICET-UNJu), San Salvador de Jujuy,
Jujuy, Argentina
2
Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias,
Universidad Nacional de Jujuy, San
Salvador de Jujuy, Argentina
Correspondence
Alejandro A. Schaaf, Instituto de
Ecorregiones Andinas (CONICET-UNJu),
Canónigo Gorriti 237 (Y4600), San
Salvador de Jujuy, Jujuy, Argentina.
Email: schaaf.alejandro@gmail.com
Funding information
Idea Wild and British Ornithologists' Union
provided funding and equipment for the
project
Austral Ecology. 2023;00:1–12.
| Accepted: 9 November 2023
2
Abstract
Citizen science projects are valuable tools since they provide substantial
amounts of data on different animal species. Currently, there are a wide variety
of platforms and objectives for diverse citizen science projects. Despite these
advances, the approaches and contributions of citizen science platforms for col-
lecting data on a particular species, and in a specific site or region, have been
poorly explored. Thus, in this article, we compare the number of participants and
the amount of data collected by three platforms on the Toco toucan (Ramphastos
toco) in San Salvador de Jujuy city, located in northwestern Argentina. This par-
ticular bird species is very charismatic and frequents urban areas all year round;
so that, it is interesting to know what contributions (e.g. participant numbers,
ecological and distribution data) are being made about this species on citizen
science platforms. Thus, we examined data reported by two global citizen sci-
ence platforms, iNaturalist and eBird, and one local platform, Tucanes en mi
Jujuy (TEMJ). We found that the local, focal TEMJ project had a greater number
of participants (n = 193), greater presence records (n = 614) and a wide spatial
distribution of data in the city. In the iNaturalist and eBird platforms, the number
of participants was smaller (n = 9 and 36, respectively), with fewer presence re-
cords (n = 12 and 178, respectively), and even fewer reports of species-specific
ecological data (feeding, behaviour and age). This reflected clear differences
between the three platforms, as TEMJ not only reported more presence data but
also more detailed information on age and behaviour. Based on this research,
we highlight the commitment of citizens to this particular project and the study
of species. Therefore, we recommend the implementation of new local and focal
citizen science platforms for more detailed ecological data on other charismatic
and focal species.
KEYWORDS
eBird, focus platforms, iNaturalist, toucans, urban birds
I N TROD UC T I O N
Over the past few years, citizen science has proven to be an important
tool for obtaining ecological data on bird species (Hall et al., 2021; Adreani
et al., 2022; Ruggera et al., 2022). This scientific approach generates large
volumes of data in relatively short periods of time, over large spatial ex-
tents. In addition, as data are collected by non-professional citizens, it pro-
motes awareness of biodiversity and environmental conservation in social
sectors that are not involved in these issues on a day-to-day basis (Adreani
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/aec
© 2023 Ecological Society of Australia. | 1
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 |    SCHAAF et al.

et al., 2022; Aplin et al., 2021; Bonney et al., 2009; Hall et al., 2021). The
records are freely available to the community, thus becoming useful con-
tributions to scientific studies which can provide feedback to the public's
demand for nature's knowledge (McCaffrey, 2005). Regarding data avail-
ability and concentration, easily accessible areas (e.g. national parks, and
urban green areas) have been shown to have a higher amount of animal
presence records (Barbosa et al., 2021; Cambria et al., 2021; Tulloch
et al., 2013). In spite of certain biases inherent in this data generation meth-
odology (Callaghan et al., 2021; Hall et al., 2021; Luna et al., 2018), this
information can be useful to model distribution, monitor migratory routes or
altitudinal movements and assess diet or the presence of relevant species
in certain regions as well as for the planning and conservation of spe-
cies in cities (Appel & de Oliveira Porfirio, 2023; Barbosa et al., 2021; Liu
et al., 2021; Randler, 2021; Sullivan et al., 2014). Most of these studies
based on citizen science data have been conducted in North America and
Europe, and to a lesser extent, in South American countries (Callaghan
et al., 2021; DeGroote et al., 2021; Donnelly et al., 2014; Lees, 2016;
Schubert et al., 2019).
There are different citizen science platforms varying in geographic scope,
focal species and participation rate, and so the structure, heterogeneity
and accuracy of the information received are also different. At one extreme,
there are platforms collecting data on a global scale, on a wide diversity of
species or groups of species, with the main input being the presence of the
species at a given time and location; this is often important for understand-
ing species distribution dynamics, continental migration routes and other
types of community data (Callaghan et al., 2021). These global platforms,
such as eBird (created in 2002) or iNaturalist (created in 2008), usually
generate large volumes of data, for many species, at broad geographic
scales, but with great heterogeneity and imprecision. At the other extreme,
there are platforms created exclusively for certain local geographic areas
and/or focused on particular species, which tend to be charismatic, rare,
threatened and/or easily identified, where the interest and commitment
of participants is often high (Appel & de Oliveira Porfirio, 2023; Barbosa
et al., 2021; Dickinson et al., 2012; Hall et al., 2021). These projects, fo-
cused on more specific objectives, can generate more precise and detailed
data on what is being investigated (Adreani et al., 2022; Hall et al., 2021;
Randler, 2021; Sullivan et al., 2014), although reduced to one or a few spe-
cies and to a single location, which may not have similar characteristics to
other locations within the range of the same species.
Despite the existence of the different citizen science platforms and their
approaches, studies comparing data collected by different citizen science
platforms, such as participation rates and type of data collected are scarce
(Hall et al., 2021; Randler, 2021). Studies like these can be very useful to
understand the accuracy and scope of ecological data collected (e.g. be-
haviour, patterns and geographic coverage, density of sightings in urban
sites) as well as to examine the effectiveness of new platforms compared to
existing ones (Hall et al., 2021). In addition, such comparative studies can be
useful to optimize the strategy of conservation projects and/or focal species,
in order to understand what data are being collected on each type of plat-
form, and to make recommendations (Hall et al., 2021; Luna et al., 2018).
For example, recommendations to be made could be to improve data quality
and citizen participation on particular species/sites (Barbosa et al., 2021).
In this article, we compare data of the Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco)
collected by the global platforms iNaturalist and eBird, with that of the plat-
forms ‘Tucanes en mi Jujuy’ (TEMJ), a citizen science local project created
in 2021 in San Salvador de Jujuy, northwestern Argentina. This bird spe-
cies is charismatic, easily sighted and recognized, and frequents several
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
COMPARING DIFFERENT CITIZEN SCIENCE PLATFORMS    | 3

urban areas throughout its distribution range (Horta et al., 2018; Ruggera
et al., 2022). TEMJ arose in response to increasing reports of toucan cap-
tures and mistreatment for illegal trade, in line with increasingly frequent
sightings of the species in the city (Barbarán, 2017; Ruggera et al., 2022).
At the same time, this opportunity was used to obtain ecological data on
the species in an urban environment like seasonality, feeding, reproduc-
tion, and behaviour (Ruggera et al., 2022) and also to assess its status and
promote collective awareness. Because of this, and considering that this is
a species of interest and that it attracts different citizens, it is important to
know what contributions, data quality and accuracy are being made about
one focal species on different platforms.
For this, we explored whether the platforms had any differences in terms
of the level of participation, type of ecological data obtained and geograph-
ical coverage of the reports within the city. We predict to (1) report a higher
proportion of participants recording this species on the global platforms
(iNaturalist and eBird), as they are widely recognized by photographers,
naturalists and birdwatchers; (2) As a consequence of this, greater geo-
graphic coverage and reporting in the city is expected on these global plat-
forms; (3) whereas for the TEMJ platform, which is local and newly created,
we expect to have more precise ecological data as a result of more accu-
rate information gathering on the platform.

M E T H OD S

Study species

The Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco; Piciformes) is a bird native to South

America, with a wide distribution in Bolivia, Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina.
It is the only toucan species not abundant in primary forests, being more
frequent in forest edges, open, rural, suburban and urban sites with a lot of
green areas (Horta et al., 2018; Short & Horne, 2002). It is the largest spe-
cies of toucan, varying between 55 and 61 cm in length, and between 500
and 860 g in weight, with a large beak, which can reach up to 1/3 of its total
length (Short & Horne, 2002) (Figure 1). It feeds mainly on fruits, as well
as arthropods, amphibians, reptiles, eggs and chicks of other bird species
(Moresco, 2019; Ragusa-Netto, 2013; Ruggera et al. 2022; Silva, 2019).
During the spring and austral summer (October to February), the species
nests in tree cavities, laying 2–4 white eggs, which are incubated by both
partners for 17–18 days and the chicks remain in the nest for 43–52 days
(de la Peña, 2019; Di Giacomo, 2005; Short & Horne, 2002). Its conserva-
tion status is of Least Concern according to the IUCN, however, as it is il-
legally captured and sold as pets, it is listed on CITES Appendix II (BirdLife
International, 2017).

Study area

San Salvador de Jujuy city, the capital of Jujuy province (northwest

Argentina), has an area of 53 219 km2 and about 700 000 inhabitants
(24°11′ S, 65°17′ W) (according to the 2022 Census, INDEC), and it is lo-
cated in the Southern Yungas ecoregion, between 1200 and 1400 m.a.s.l.
The urban axis is intersected by two large mountain rivers, and the vegeta-
tion in the city is predominantly arboreal and herbaceous, with the shrub
layer being mostly confined to residential gardens, parks and riverbanks.
Although the vegetation is heterogeneously distributed, street, park and
garden trees are the most abundant plant components (Albornoz, 2019).
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 |    SCHAAF et al.

F I G U R E 1 Total number of participants and Toco toucan (Rhampastos toco) sightings reported on all three citizen science platforms
and a detailed timeline showing the number of reports per year until December 2022.

Citizen science project: Tucanes en mi Jujuy

Data for the project Tucanes en mi Jujuy (hereafter TEMJ) were obtained
from the participation of the inhabitants of San Salvador de Jujuy city
through the completion of a Google Forms questionnaire, which has been
accessible through the project's social networks (Facebook and Instagram:
https://​www.​faceb​ook.​com/​tucan​esenm​ijujuy- https://​www.​insta​gram.​com/​
tucan​esenm​ijujuy/ ​) since May 2021. In this form, based on different items
and filling options, citizens reported the presence of toucans in the city, pro-
viding information on the date and time of the observation, location, number
of individuals, age of the specimens (i.e. juveniles or adults) and behaviour:
(1) feeding: preferably with a description of what they were eating: fruits,
flowers, insects, other birds' eggs/chicks, others; (2) nesting; (3) chasing:
in cases where toucans were seen being chased by other birds; (4) social
interactions between toucans, such as grooming, pecking, among other
behaviours. We also included photographs in the form to help with the iden-
tification of juveniles and adults, indicating the differences mainly in relative
size and beak colouration. The Google Form template and the images of
adult and juvenile toucans are provided in the Supporting Information.

Data collection and analysis

We downloaded data on the species records available in iNaturalist,

eBird (databases from their online platforms) and TEMJ (Google Forms
database on the project page). We considered all available data on the
three platforms, from their creation until the cut-off date of 31 December
2022. To compare the data collected in each project platform we regis-
tered: the number of participants, number of sightings per year reports
of toucan individuals per participant, age (adult or juvenile), behaviour
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
COMPARING DIFFERENT CITIZEN SCIENCE PLATFORMS    | 5

(e.g. feeding, perched in a tree or urban structure, flying, nesting) and

additional comments (e.g. what was the individual feeding on or in which
direction it was flying). Records from the three platforms were checked
to eliminate duplicates (same GPS point, username and observation
time/day) and errors regarding the location (points outside of the defined
urban axis).
We tested whether the mean (±S.E.) and median number of sightings
and individuals reported by each participant differed between projects
with a non-parametric Kruskal Wallis (K) analysis of median variance,
using Infostat software (Di Rienzo et al., 2010), as data were not normally
distributed (tested by Shapiro–Wilk tests). We evaluated each platform
in detail, estimating the proportion of input data: age (juvenile/adult), be-
haviour, images and comments, in order to obtain information on the con-
tributions provided by the participants on this kind of information (Hall
et al., 2021).
Finally, to obtain a spatial representation of the species' records in the
city, the location data (GPS) obtained from each observation of the Toco
Toucan were entered into the QGIS software, and a heat map was gen-
erated for each project. This methodology seeks to represent the trend in
the spatial distribution of the data, showing a gradient of record concentra-
tion, providing a visual interpretation of the city areas with the highest den-
sity, the absence of records in certain zones and the data concentration
(Fletcher & Fortin, 2018).

RESU LT S

In total, 804 Toco toucan sightings were reported for the city on the three
platforms: iNaturalist (n = 12), eBird (n = 178) and TEMJ (n = 614). We
found that TEMJ had the highest number of participants reporting a sight-
ing (n = 193) and also the greatest number of individual Toco toucans
reported (n = 1686) in 19 months of data collection (May 2021–December
2022). Conversely, iNaturalist and eBird had fewer participants and a
lower total number of individuals registered, although these platforms
have been collecting data for several more years (14 and 20 years, re-
spectively) than TEMJ (Figure 1). The number of reports per participant
did not differ significantly between citizen science projects (K = 2.85,
p = 0.160). Regarding the number of individuals recorded per sighting,
iNaturalist resulted significantly lower from eBird and TEMJ platforms
(K = 11.14, p < 0.01) (Table 1). In all three projects, the most frequent sight-
ings reported 1 or 2 individuals, with only eBird and TEMJ reporting more
than 2 (Figure 2).
The iNaturalist sightings reported photographs, but no age and be-
havioural data of the Toucan individuals, although from that information , it
was possible to extract age (adult or juvenile) and behaviour (e.g. perched,
eating, flying) in all cases, and not additional comments were provided. For
example, in one image, could be recognized a juvenile from other adult
individuals. Regarding eBird, photo and comments information were ex-
tracted from less than 10% of the total sighting data provided: age of 16 in-
dividuals (5 reported as juveniles), and five types of behaviour (feeding and
flying). The TEMJ platform did not allow for image attachments, but more
than 90% of the participants reported data on age and all participants reg-
istered behavioural data and additional comments (Figure 3). Finally, from
heat maps, we could easily observe the greater amount of data recorded
for the TEMJ project, and it was also clear that sightings in TEMJ covered
a wider area of the city with data (Figure 4).
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 |    SCHAAF et al.

TA B L E 1 Total number of reports and observations of Toco toucan (Rhampastos toco)

individuals in all three citizen science projects.

Range
Project N (min–max) Mean ± S.E Median

Number of records
iNaturalist 9 1–4 1.33 ± 1.00 1
eBird 36 1–24 3.97 ± 5.95 1
TEMJ 193 1–40 3.18 ± 10.1 1
Number of sighting
iNaturalist 12 1–2 1.08 ± 0.29 1a
eBird 178 1–14 2.42 ± 2.50 2b
TEMJ 614 1–22 2.76 ± 2.84 2b
Note: Different letters indicate statistical differences in the Kruscal–Wallis test (p < 0.05).

FIGURE 2 Percentage of Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco) sightings recorded on each citizen science platform.

D I SCUS S I O N

The three citizen science platforms reflected clear differences in the

overall number of participants, amount of ecological data and spatial
distribution of sightings (heat maps) that can be obtained on the Toco
toucan. These differences may stem from variations in each platform
method and participatory approach (Hall et al., 2021). For example, iN-
aturalist and eBird are recording platforms open to many bird species,
and particularly iNaturalist also collects data on other animal species,
hence, the focus is on recording the presence of many species across
different locations (Callaghan et al., 2018; Hall et al., 2021; McKinley
et al., 2017). In contrast, TEMJ collects data for a single species and
was designed to obtain occurrence data in the city of San Salvador de
Jujuy, as well as specific and easy-to-collect ecological data. Therefore,
we can argue that when the study focus is more specific based on a spe-
cies, more generalist platforms tend to be less accurate and effective in
collecting specific information about birds; however, it should be noted
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
COMPARING DIFFERENT CITIZEN SCIENCE PLATFORMS    | 7

FIGURE 3 Proportion of information reported on the Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco) in the three citizen science projects.

that this may also be due to the fact that cities have a higher popula-
tion density (Cambria et al., 2021; Tulloch et al., 2013). For example, we
expected a higher number of records in iNaturalist and eBird platforms
than in TEMJ, since they have been in force for a greater number of
years, and that tourist cities such as San Salvador de Jujuy host not only
residents but also tourists who may be more familiar with these globally
known platforms, than with the local new TEMJ (Barbosa et al., 2021).
This situation may result from the low number of birdwatchers using this
platform to register urban information on this species, with more data
being concentrated in non-urban and touristic areas, and by birdwatch-
ers with a greater affinity for birds. It is worth noting that for the whole
Jujuy province, the total number of toucan records in iNaturalist is 82
and for eBird around 1500, with a higher proportion of data belonging to
national parks, private reserves and native forest areas (iNaturalist and
eBird data). This information indicates that the participants of these two
platforms are more involved with native forest environments, whereas
TEMJ is rather local and involves a general public interested in the spe-
cies. It would therefore be interesting to find out if the low number of
bird records occurs only in this city, or in other Argentinian cities as
well. In addition, based on the timeline of data, iNaturalist and eBird re-
corded the highest number of reports during 2020 and 2021, which can
be explained by the onset of movement restrictions due to the COVID-
19 pandemic, leading to an increase in urban contributions (Crimmins
et al., 2021; Roll et al., 2021).
When reviewing previous studies, we found similar results in terms of
the specific reporting of ecological data. For example, in Australia, Hall
et al. (2021) examined data collected for a charismatic and easily identifi-
able bird species, the Australian brush-turkey (Alectura lathami), from iNat-
uralist, eBird and the species-specific BrushTurkeys project. In this study,
they found a higher quantity of reports on iNaturalist and eBird. However,
it is worth mentioning that this project included reports from the entire
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 |    SCHAAF et al.

F I G U R E 4 Heat map showing the geographic distribution of the Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco) in San Salvador de Jujuy urban areas.
We provide a map for each citizen science project: iNaturalist (iNat), eBird and Tucanes en mi Jujuy (TEMJ).

distribution range of the species concluding that the eBird platform pro-
vides a larger volume of data, but the BrushTurkeys focal platform provides
more data in cities and more specific ecological information. Besides, in
a recent Brazilian paper, Appel and de Oliveira Porfirio (2023) studied the
diet of the Blue and Yellow Macaw (Ara ararauna) based on data recorded
from different citizen science platforms (Wikiaves, iNaturalist and eBird), in
an urban area of central Brazil. These authors found that the total number
of the species' presence records in the entire city considering all three
platforms was 442, but only about 10% reported diet data for this species.
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
COMPARING DIFFERENT CITIZEN SCIENCE PLATFORMS    | 9

Both studies, as well as our own, have focused on charismatic and easily
recognizable species, which raises the question of what would happen if
the focal study species were less charismatic, less attractive and/or diffi-
cult to identify species? This needs to be explored in the future, in order to
know what amount, accuracy and type of data can be obtained in global
platforms and in local projects.
The TEMJ project collected more presence records and ecological data
on the species than the other platforms, being active for only 19 months,
compared to eBird (20 years) and iNaturalist (14 years). Also, a question
that should be studied in the future is whether the fact that this particular
project (TEMJ) is generated by social networks (Facebook and Instagram)
influenced the increased data collection (Luna et al., 2018). That is, this
project does not require downloading, app installation or account creation
to the mobile phone or computer; it only requires the completion of a simple
form that is available on the project's social networks; which can facilitate
agile development and data uploading. Thus, we recommend the use of
new species-focused citizen science platforms (Hall et al., 2021), whereas
global platforms such as iNaturalist and eBird could be used to analyse the
presence of this species in different cities, not only in Argentina but also
in other countries, as these platforms contain a greater magnitude of data
and the studied species has a very wide distribution range.
With regard to the limitations of this project, the accuracy of some eco-
logical data should be considered with caution. For example, as juveniles
approach their first year, the differences with adults become less and less
noticeable, and binoculars may sometimes be needed to distinguish them.
Therefore, some juveniles may have been mistaken for adults. This could
be solved by mandatory images provided by participants, as in the iNatu-
ralist project. However, this is likely to be more successful in projects where
people are more engaged, such as regular wildlife photographers and bird-
watchers (Hall et al., 2021; Wood et al., 2011). This, in turn, may help to
provide more detail on the behaviour of bird species, although it may also
lead to some bias. That is, the photographer can possibly wait for a certain
behaviour to take place (feeding, in flight) and then take the photograph.
Therefore, we believe that photographs and detailed behavioural informa-
tion (and its potential biases) should be explored and considered in greater
detail in citizen science projects.
Finally, at the local level (project TEMJ), future challenges will be to keep
the public interest in this species and to diversify and plan strategies to im-
prove the accuracy of the ecological data collected. That is why, the need
for maintaining participants' engagement with charismatic and easily iden-
tifiable species is useful for current citizen science projects, which have
great potential for sustainable urban planning and studies on bird habitat
use in cities (Appel & de Oliveira Porfirio, 2023; Barbosa et al., 2021; Brown
& Williams, 2019; Hall et al., 2021; Steger et al., 2017). In addition, we en-
courage the creation of new local platforms that pre-check existing data on
global platforms and build projects on specific and/or missing ecological
information.

AU T H O R C O N T R I B U T I O N S
Alejandro A. Schaaf: Conceptualization (equal); data curation (equal);
formal analysis (equal); funding acquisition (equal); investigation (equal);
methodology (equal); project administration (equal); resources (equal);
software (equal); supervision (equal); validation (equal); visualization
(equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review and editing (equal).
Laura M. Haag: Conceptualization (equal); investigation (equal); meth-
odology (equal); resources (equal); software (equal); supervision (equal);
visualization (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 |    SCHAAF et al.

and editing (equal). Noelia Gonzalez Baffa Trasci: Conceptualization

(equal); formal analysis (equal); investigation (equal); methodology
(equal); resources (equal); software (equal); supervision (equal); valida-
tion (equal); visualization (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writ-
ing – review and editing (equal). Agustina Yapura: Conceptualization
(equal); data curation (equal); formal analysis (equal); methodology
(equal); resources (equal); software (equal); supervision (equal); valida-
tion (equal); visualization (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing
– review and editing (equal). Natalia Chocobar: Investigation (equal);
methodology (equal); resources (equal); software (equal); supervision
(equal); validation (equal); visualization (equal); writing – review and ed-
iting (equal). Sol A. Caldano: Conceptualization (equal); investigation
(equal); software (equal); validation (equal); visualization (equal); writ-
ing – review and editing (equal). Roman A. Ruggera: Conceptualization
(equal); data curation (equal); formal analysis (equal); funding acquisi-
tion (equal); investigation (equal); methodology (equal); project adminis-
tration (equal); resources (equal); software (equal); supervision (equal);
validation (equal); visualization (equal); writing – original draft (equal);
writing – review and editing (equal).

AC K N O​W L E​D G E​M E N T S

We thank the editor and the reviewers for the constructive comments that
greatly improved the manuscript. We are grateful for the collaboration
and support provided by the Department of Environmental Promotion
at the Municipalidad de San Salvador de Jujuy, especially to Cristina
Remondegui. Special thanks to all the citizens who contributed to the
TEMJ Project.

F U N D I N G I N FO R M AT I O N
Idea Wild and British Ornithologists' Union provided funding and equip-
ment for the project.

C O N F L I C T O F I N T E R E S T S TAT E M E N T
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

DATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T

Research data are not shared.

ORCID
Alejandro A. Schaaf https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3968-5452
Noelia V. Gonzalez Baffa-Trasci https://orcid.
org/0000-0001-5666-8614

REFERENCES
Adreani, N.M., Valcu, M., Scientists, C. & Mentesana, L. (2022) Asymmetric architecture is
non-random and repeatable in a bird's nests. Current Biology, 32, R412–R413.
Albornoz, L. (2019) Tipificación del crecimiento urbano en las áreas de influencia de los
principales ríos del aglomerado Gran San Salvador de Jujuy. En XIII Jornadas de
Sociología. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Aplin, L.M., Major, R.E., Davis, A. & Martin, J.M. (2021) A citizen science approach reveals
long-term social network structure in an urban parrot, Cacatua galerita. The Journal of
Animal Ecology, 90, 222–232.
Appel, S.C. & de Oliveira Porfirio, G.E. (2023) The contribution of citizen science to the
knowledge on the feeding habits of Ara ararauna in an urban area of central-western
Brazil. Ornitología Neotropical, 34, 6–10.
Barbarán, F. (2017) Perception and use of birds in rural ecosystems of Salta, Jujuy and
southern Bolivia. Hornero, 32, 63–71.
 14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
COMPARING DIFFERENT CITIZEN SCIENCE PLATFORMS    | 11

Barbosa, K.V., Develey, P.F., Ribeiro, M.C. & Jahn, A.E. (2021) The contribution of citizen sci-
ence to research on migratory and urban birds in Brazil. Ornithology Research, 29(1),
1–11.
BirdLife International. (2017) Ramphastos toco (amended version of 2016 assessment). The
IUCN red list of threatened species 2017: e.T22682164A113557535.
Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V. et al. (2009)
Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific liter-
acy. Bioscience, 59, 977–984.
Brown, E.D. & Williams, B.K. (2019) The potential for citizen science to produce reliable and
useful information in ecology. Conservation Biology, 33(3), 561–569.
Callaghan, C.T., Watson, J.E., Lyons, M.B., Cornwell, W.K. & Fuller, R.A. (2021) Conservation
birding: a quantitative conceptual framework for prioritizing citizen science observa-
tions. Biological Conservation, 253, 108912.
Cambria, V.E., Campagnaro, T., Trentanovi, G., Testolin, R., Attorre, F. & Sitzia, T. (2021)
Citizen science data to measure human use of green areas and forests in European
cities. Forests, 12, 779.
Crimmins, T.M., Posthumus, E., Schaffer, S. & Prudic, K.L. (2021) COVID-19 impacts on par-
ticipation in large scale biodiversity-themed community science projects in the United
States. Biological Conservation, 256, 109017.
DeGroote, L.W., Hingst-Zaher, E., Moreira-Lima, L., Whitacre, J.V., Slyder, J.B. & Wenzel,
J.W. (2021) Citizen science data reveals the cryptic migration of the common Potoo
Nyctibius griseus in Brazil. Ibis, 163(2), 380–389.
Di Giacomo, A.G. (2005) Aves de la Reserva El Bagual. Pp. 201-465 en: Di Giacomo A.G. y
Krapovickas S.F (eds) Historia natural y paisaje de la Reserva El Bagual, provincia de
Formosa, Argentina. Inventario de la fauna de vertebrados y de la flora vascular de 20
un área del Chaco Húmedo. Temas de Naturaleza y Conservación 4. Aves Argentinas/
AOP, Buenos Aires.
Di Rienzo, J., Balzarini, M., Gonzalez, L., Casanoves, F., Tablada, M. & Walter Robledo, C.
(2010) Infostat: software Para análisis estadístico.
Dickinson, J.L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R.L., Martin, J. et al. (2012) The cur-
rent state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10, 291–297.
Donnelly, A., Crowe, O., Regan, E., Begley, S. & Caffarra, A. (2014) The role of citizen sci-
ence in monitoring biodiversity in Ireland. International Journal of Biometeorology, 58,
1237–1249.
Fletcher, R. & Fortin, M. (2018) Spatial ecology and conservation modeling. Cham: Springer
International Publishing, p. 523.
Hall, M.J., Martin, J.M., Burns, A.L. & Hochuli, D.F. (2021) Ecological insights into a charis-
matic bird using different citizen science approaches. Austral Ecology, 46, 1255–1265.
Horta, M.B., Bhakti, T., Cordeiro, P.F., Carvalho-Ribeiro, S.M., Fernandes, G.W. & Goulart,
F.F. (2018) Functional connectivity in urban landscapes promoted by Ramphastos toco
(Toco toucan) and its implications for policy making. Urban Ecosystem, 21, 1097–1111.
Lees, A.C. (2016) Evidence for longitudinal migration by a “sedentary” Brazilian flycatcher,
the ash-throated Casiornis. Journal of Field Ornithology, 87(3), 251–259.
Liu, H.Y., Dörler, D., Heigl, F. & Grossberndt, S. (2021) Citizen science platforms. The Science
of Citizen Science., 22, 439–459.
Luna, S., Gold, M., Albert, A., Ceccaroni, L., Claramunt, B., Danylo, O. et al. (2018) Developing
mobile applications for environmental and biodiversity citizen science: consider-
ations and recommendations. Multimedia Tools and Applications for Environmental &
Biodiversity Informatics, pp. 9–30.
McCaffrey, R.E. (2005) Using citizen science in urban bird studies. Urban Habitats, 3, 70–86.
McKinley, D.C., Miller-Rushing, A.J., Ballard, H.L., Bonney, R., Brown, H., Cook-Patton, S.C.
et al. (2017) Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource man-
agement, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation, 208, 15–28.
Moresco, D.G. (2019) Uso de señuelo por Tucán Grande (Ramphastos toco) para capturar
limonera grande (Papilio thoas). Nuestras Aves, 64, 13–14.
de la Peña, M.R. (2019) Aves argentinas: descripción, comportamiento, reproducción y
distribución. Comunicaciones del Museo Provincial de Ciencias Naturales “Florentino
Ameghino” (Nueva Serie) N° 7.
Ragusa-Netto, J. (2013) Frugivory by Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco) inhabiting a mountain
chain in the Brazilian cerrado. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 125, 616–626.
Randler, C. (2021) Users of a citizen science platform for bird data collection differ from
other birdwatchers in knowledge and degree of specialization. Global Ecology and
Conservation, 27, e01580.
Roll, U., Jarić, I., Jepson, P., da Costa-Pinto, A.L., Pinheiro, B.R., Correia, R.A. et al. (2021)
COVID-19 lockdowns increase public interest in urban nature. Frontiers in Ecology and
the Environment, 19, 320–322.

12 |    SCHAAF et al.
How to cite this article:
Schaaf, A.A., Haag, L.M.,
Gonzalez Baffa-Trasci, N.V.,
Yapura, A., Chocobar, N.,
Caldano, S.A. et al. (2023)
Comparing different citizen
science platforms for
collecting urban ecological
data from Toco toucan
(Ramphastos toco) in
Argentina. Austral Ecology,
00, 1–12. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1111/
aec.13459
14429993, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13459 by CAPES, Wiley Online Library on [01/12/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Ruggera R. A., Yapura A., Chocobar N., Baffa-Trasci N. G., Caldano S. A. & Schaaf A. A.
(2022) Ecología urbana del Tucán Grande (Ramphastos toco) en Jujuy: resultados pre-
liminares de un proyecto de ciencia ciudadana. El Hornero 37(2).
Schubert, S.C., Manica, L.T. & Guaraldo, A.D.C. (2019) Revealing the potential of a huge
citizen-science platform to study bird migration. EMU, 119(4), 364–373.
Short, L.L. & Horne, J.F.M. (2002) Family Ramphastidae (toucans). In: del Hoyo, J. & Elliott
y J Sargatal, A. (Eds.) Handbook of the birds of the world. Volume 7. Barcelona: Lynx
Edicions, pp. 220–272.
Silva, P.A. (2019) Flower eating by the Toco toucan (Ramphastos toco) in an anthropogenic
landscape during the dry season. Ornitología Neotropical, 30, 51–55.
Steger, C., Butt, B. & Hooten, M.B. (2017) Safari science: assessing the reliability of citizen
science data for wildlife surveys. Journal of Applied Ecology, 54, 2053–2062.
Sullivan, B.L., Aycrigg, J.L., Barry, J.H., Bonney, R.E., Bruns, N., Cooper, C.B. et al. (2014)
The eBird enterprise: an integrated approach to development and application of citizen
science. Biological Conservation, 169, 31–40.
Tulloch, A.I., Possingham, H.P., Joseph, L.N., Szabo, J. & Martin, T.G. (2013) Realising the
full potential of citizen science monitoring programs. Biological Conservation, 165,
128–138.
Wood C., Sullivan B., Iliff M., Fink D. & Kelling S. (2011) eBird: engaging birders in science
and conservation. PLoS biology 9(12), e1001220.
S U PP O R T I N G I N FO R M AT I O N
Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting
Information section at the end of this article.