Unfortunately at the moment there’s no way to change the colours of BioInsights, and because of the complexity involved it’s very difficult for me to get it to work with Observatory’s built-in theming. I am working on a theming option though, and made good progress recently. In the meantime, you could go into settings and disable the headers completely.
MattG's Observatory plugins
- Thread starter MattG
- Start date
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
That will work, thanks!
How many Codex first entries do you want? YES 
New region? I think there are still a couple I haven't visited!
Yes, I am in a new region, but it is not only a new codex entry for me, these 6 bioforms with these colors have not been found by anyone in this region before.
I have had 1 or 2 new first entries in a system from time to time.
2-3 weeks ago I also had the very first find of Concha Biconcavis here in the Errant Marches Region, on 3 different moons around a Gas Giant, each a different color, so 3 Codex first entries.
But this find from yesterday, 6 first entries on 6 different bioforms, MEGA
, I'm very happy with that.
Yes I see those as well, I have also managed to find a couple of new bio's in regions that haven't been seen before in that region, it's always a good feeling!
A kind of question. I didn't think of taking screenshots or notes at the time, so I have no certain details except my memory. EDDiscovery tells me my only recent Paleas was in Pueliae ST-K c23-0, and Canonn Signals website indicates it was Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A 1 e.
The other day, I saw that BioInsight predicted a exobio signal as
♦ Stratum Limax ♦ <Colour?>
A check in the Codex verified that I had no entry for Stratum Limax at all. But it got me wondering about what the ♦ really meant. The 'About' says 'Possible New Personal Codex Entry'. As it certainly would be one I was interested, but I found it strange that the first ♦ (attached to Stratum) seemed incorrect (as Stratum certainly was in my Codex), the Limax looked as if it should carry one as I had no Limax, and that the one on the colour was superfluous if Limax was the new Codex entry. But I probably misinterpret.
Question 1: Is there any significance in the placement of the ♦ ? Does it tell me the 'level' in the taxonomy that is affected?
So of course I checked it. Wasn't a Limax, was a Paleas. But as it didn't get a !! for 'not predicted' I sort of thought this was expected, ... but I've begun wondering if that was correct.
Question 2: At what 'level' do non-predicted species/variants get the '!!' marker?
The other day, I saw that BioInsight predicted a exobio signal as
♦ Stratum Limax ♦ <Colour?>
A check in the Codex verified that I had no entry for Stratum Limax at all. But it got me wondering about what the ♦ really meant. The 'About' says 'Possible New Personal Codex Entry'. As it certainly would be one I was interested, but I found it strange that the first ♦ (attached to Stratum) seemed incorrect (as Stratum certainly was in my Codex), the Limax looked as if it should carry one as I had no Limax, and that the one on the colour was superfluous if Limax was the new Codex entry. But I probably misinterpret.
Question 1: Is there any significance in the placement of the ♦ ? Does it tell me the 'level' in the taxonomy that is affected?
So of course I checked it. Wasn't a Limax, was a Paleas. But as it didn't get a !! for 'not predicted' I sort of thought this was expected, ... but I've begun wondering if that was correct.
Question 2: At what 'level' do non-predicted species/variants get the '!!' marker?
Last edited:
I can't find these in Canonn Bioforge so perhaps it wasn't reported there.
Are bio entries lost in EDDN, or is it just that individual databases decide that Genus is all that matters?
Last edited:
A while back I was asking questions about scanning, and apparently the same information isn't supplied by the two methods of scanning, the hand scanner and ship/SRV scanner, they actually get less information if you only use the hand scanner? Now if I scan it's mainly the ship/SRV scanner if I don't collect samples, but when I do I always make sure to scan using both devices, so I wonder if that's what's happening here? Do people just hand scan or do they do both? Maybe these aren't getting reported because they were only hand scanned?
That's a possibility, and that may be a reason why so few sources for searching for species/variants exist.
I recently noted that EDAstro maps for various exobio (different colours for genus + species) often included an entry for genus only, but unknown species. It occurred to me that some of those might be targets for additional work to get the full record, especially for rare ones like the Biconcavis, but so far I haven't found any simple way of finding them.
When I look in my journal at each function, hand scanner and ship scanner this is what I get;
Ship scanner:
| At Col 285 Sector VT-R d4-117, Col 285 Sector VT-R d4-117 5, ID7, in Inner Orion Spur, Clypeus Margaritus - Amethyst, Biological and Geological, Organic structures, New Entry, Latitude: -31.8129°, Longitude: -115.8713° |
So star system, planet, region, bio type, feature type, and actual lat and lon on the surface.
Hand scanner:
| Sample: Clypeus, Margaritus, Amethyst, (11,873,200) cr @ Col 285 Sector VT-R d4-117 5 |
So type, value and planet.
That's a huge difference in reported data and couild be what is leading to inconsistencies in stored data, so if I only hand scan there's actually very little information actually being reported. So always scan with ship/SRV scanner I guess.
Oh yes the other thing is, with the genus only entries that's because the planet has been scanned with the FSS which reports the genus for that planet, but not species, so that's failry obvious, any body scanned with the FSS but not having had the bio actually scanned directly will only report the genus, thus:
| Biological: 6, @ Col 285 Sector VT-R d4-117 5 Bacterium, Cactoida, Clypeus, Osseus, Frutexa, Tussock |
1. If any variant (colour) is a new personal codex entry (either on a region or galactic level depending on what's set in Settings) it will get a blue diamond by in the Variant column. If there are any variants that have a blue diamond and that are not marked Unlikely, it will also put a blue diamond at the far left of the column, next to Genus. Once a new bio is sampled, it will leave the blue diamond by the Variant but remove it from the left side (it will also remove the blue diamond from any instances of the same bio in the same system on different planets). It did not originally do this, it was something that was requested because it's much easier at a glance to see what bios still have blue diamonds by looking down the left side.
2. For not predicted bios, it will put the symbol in the Type field just to the left of the Species name and will put a "NOT PREDICTED:" prefix in the Variant column
You mean DSS there, don't you? FSS only tells you number of signals, it's the DSS that puts the genus names onto the list ... at least in the user interface; not sure I've ever double checked the logs, come to think of it.
That's what I had expected. But when I got a predicted Stratus Limax, which on comp scanning turned out to be a Paleas, and BioInsight just readjustsed what it displayed without indicating a not predicted, I began wondering if that was expected behaviour or if it might be a bug, or if it was only limited the genus preduction.
I'll check the code but it's not possible for BioInsights to edit entries like that - if it found a bio it hadn't predicted, it would have to add a new one and it'd be missing details like bio type (material or star), which is part of the reason the unpredicted symbol sits there. It also can't delete an incorrect prediction, it would mark it not present instead. There is an option in the settings to supress showing bios that are not present though (but that still wouldn't explain it adding the other entry, and this option isn't enabled by default).
Also, it doesn't predict them at "levels" really. It doesn't look at Stratum and decide there might be some. and then try and narrow down Species/variant. It goes through the entire list of biological species it knows about and compares them the the scanned body - if all the criteria are met, then it will look at the possible colours that might be possible and which is most likely.
If you have the journal and system name in question, it might help narrow down what you encountered.
Wow, I didn't know that. What a mess. So far I have only ever used my hand scanner. I will also use my vehicle scanner from now on, at least for the first sample.
Yah i did sorry, sometimes get them confused that was a dss scan.
Since learning that I always ship scan first. If I see 3 of 4 types of bio when I get down to the surface I scan each one with the ship scanner even if I am not sampling them, then I sample the ones I need or want, either first codex entry for region or a high value bio. The ship scanner returns everything apart from the value, and I don't see that as being important in the grand scheme of things, we already know those values and they never change.
I think I got it. EDDiscovery seems to disorder my log lines more than I expected, so that may be the reason I didn't see it at first.
It is a double visit, with FSS in the first followed by a leave, shutdown in between, and a revisit for DSS in the second a couple of hours later, with two separate log files.
That could easily confuse things if the first visit is no longer in context for the predictions during the second visit.
The system is "StarSystem":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0" in case. (I see spansh has info from visit1 only, EDSM and Inara none at all ... so it may have confused other systems as well. Canon Signals have everything, as far as I can see.)
It looks like I ran my log checker during the shutdown, discovered that the system had bio signals but that I had forgotten to DSS scan them, and returned to finish
the job. Not sure when I looked as BioInsight, but if visit1 was entirely out of context I expect it wouldn't have said anything until the DSS scan had finished.
The body details from visit 1 in log 1 are:
JSON:
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T08:31:03Z", "event":"FSSBodySignals", "BodyName":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A 1 e", "BodyID":15, "SystemAddress":113850686922, "Signals":[ { "Type":"$SAA_SignalType_Biological;", "Type_Localised":"Biological", "Count":4 } ] }
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T08:31:03Z", "event":"Scan", "ScanType":"Detailed", "BodyName":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A 1 e", "BodyID":15, "Parents":[ {"Planet":10}, {"Star":1}, {"Null":0} ], "StarSystem":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0", "SystemAddress":113850686922, "DistanceFromArrivalLS":1055.037302, "TidalLock":true, "TerraformState":"", "PlanetClass":"Rocky body", "Atmosphere":"thin carbon dioxide atmosphere", "AtmosphereType":"CarbonDioxide", "AtmosphereComposition":[ { "Name":"CarbonDioxide", "Percent":99.009911 }, { "Name":"SulphurDioxide", "Percent":0.990099 } ], "Volcanism":"", "MassEM":0.001964, "Radius":879801.750000, "SurfaceGravity":1.011064, "SurfaceTemperature":166.053940, "SurfacePressure":2008.307129, "Landable":true, "Materials":[ { "Name":"iron", "Percent":19.983900 }, { "Name":"sulphur", "Percent":19.531021 }, { "Name":"carbon", "Percent":16.423567 }, { "Name":"nickel", "Percent":15.114984 }, { "Name":"phosphorus", "Percent":10.514649 }, { "Name":"chromium", "Percent":8.987422 }, { "Name":"selenium", "Percent":3.056770 }, { "Name":"arsenic", "Percent":2.598659 }, { "Name":"niobium", "Percent":1.365793 }, { "Name":"ruthenium", "Percent":1.234133 }, { "Name":"tin", "Percent":1.189108 } ], "Composition":{ "Ice":0.000000, "Rock":0.911187, "Metal":0.088813 }, "SemiMajorAxis":3237367570.400238, "Eccentricity":0.006633, "OrbitalInclination":0.011714, "Periapsis":220.725647, "OrbitalPeriod":4370443.284512, "AscendingNode":163.114889, "MeanAnomaly":188.225291, "RotationPeriod":4370519.902315, "AxialTilt":0.036380, "WasDiscovered":false, "WasMapped":false }The relevant log lines from visit 2 in log 2 are:
JSON:
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T09:50:37Z", "event":"FSDJump", "Taxi":false, "Multicrew":false, "StarSystem":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0", "SystemAddress":113850686922, "StarPos":[17864.00000,575.96875,14036.84375], "SystemAllegiance":"", "SystemEconomy":"$economy_None;", "SystemEconomy_Localised":"None", "SystemSecondEconomy":"$economy_None;", "SystemSecondEconomy_Localised":"None", "SystemGovernment":"$government_None;", "SystemGovernment_Localised":"None", "SystemSecurity":"$GAlAXY_MAP_INFO_state_anarchy;", "SystemSecurity_Localised":"Anarchy", "Population":0, "Body":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A", "BodyID":1, "BodyType":"Star", "JumpDist":46.353, "FuelUsed":2.558156, "FuelLevel":28.461981 }
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T10:04:33Z", "event":"SAAScanComplete", "BodyName":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A 1 e", "SystemAddress":113850686922, "BodyID":15, "ProbesUsed":2, "EfficiencyTarget":2 }
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T10:04:33Z", "event":"SAASignalsFound", "BodyName":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A 1 e", "SystemAddress":113850686922, "BodyID":15, "Signals":[ { "Type":"$SAA_SignalType_Biological;", "Type_Localised":"Biological", "Count":4 } ], "Genuses":[ { "Genus":"$Codex_Ent_Bacterial_Genus_Name;", "Genus_Localised":"Bacterium" }, { "Genus":"$Codex_Ent_Stratum_Genus_Name;", "Genus_Localised":"Stratum" }, { "Genus":"$Codex_Ent_Tubus_Genus_Name;", "Genus_Localised":"Tubus" }, { "Genus":"$Codex_Ent_Tussocks_Genus_Name;", "Genus_Localised":"Tussock" } ] }
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T10:04:34Z", "event":"Scan", "ScanType":"Detailed", "BodyName":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0 A 1 e", "BodyID":15, "Parents":[ {"Planet":10}, {"Star":1}, {"Null":0} ], "StarSystem":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0", "SystemAddress":113850686922, "DistanceFromArrivalLS":1055.080068, "TidalLock":true, "TerraformState":"", "PlanetClass":"Rocky body", "Atmosphere":"thin carbon dioxide atmosphere", "AtmosphereType":"CarbonDioxide", "AtmosphereComposition":[ { "Name":"CarbonDioxide", "Percent":99.009911 }, { "Name":"SulphurDioxide", "Percent":0.990099 } ], "Volcanism":"", "MassEM":0.001964, "Radius":879801.750000, "SurfaceGravity":1.011064, "SurfaceTemperature":166.053940, "SurfacePressure":2008.307129, "Landable":true, "Materials":[ { "Name":"iron", "Percent":19.983900 }, { "Name":"sulphur", "Percent":19.531021 }, { "Name":"carbon", "Percent":16.423567 }, { "Name":"nickel", "Percent":15.114984 }, { "Name":"phosphorus", "Percent":10.514649 }, { "Name":"chromium", "Percent":8.987422 }, { "Name":"selenium", "Percent":3.056770 }, { "Name":"arsenic", "Percent":2.598659 }, { "Name":"niobium", "Percent":1.365793 }, { "Name":"ruthenium", "Percent":1.234133 }, { "Name":"tin", "Percent":1.189108 } ], "Composition":{ "Ice":0.000000, "Rock":0.911187, "Metal":0.088813 }, "SemiMajorAxis":3237367570.400238, "Eccentricity":0.006633, "OrbitalInclination":0.011714, "Periapsis":220.725647, "OrbitalPeriod":4370443.284512, "AscendingNode":163.114889, "MeanAnomaly":188.687447, "RotationPeriod":4370519.902315, "AxialTilt":0.036380, "WasDiscovered":false, "WasMapped":false }
{ "timestamp":"2025-01-14T10:06:52Z", "event":"CodexEntry", "EntryID":2420202, "Name":"$Codex_Ent_Stratum_02_K_Name;", "Name_Localised":"Stratum Paleas - Lime", "SubCategory":"$Codex_SubCategory_Organic_Structures;", "SubCategory_Localised":"Organic structures", "Category":"$Codex_Category_Biology;", "Category_Localised":"Biological and Geological", "Region":"$Codex_RegionName_19;", "Region_Localised":"Hawking's Gap", "System":"Pueliae ST-K c23-0", "SystemAddress":113850686922, "BodyID":15, "Latitude":-17.894503, "Longitude":-13.993968, "VoucherAmount":2500 }Weird though, that there's a second Detailed scan log after the DSS scan lines in the second file.
Last edited: