The jist of this message is just that the species in question is tricky (or might be impossible) to identify from photos of it in the field.
If you have photographed it but haven't kept the specimen then the record will be verified as normal, but there is a reasonable chance that the record might get rejected as unable to verify.
If you have actually collected a specimen then if you know (for example from a key or internet resource) what part needs to be checked then you could do that yourself and photograph the relevant bits. If you were not sure what to look for, don't have a microscope etc. then the best thing to do would be to get in touch with your local county recorder for whatever group of organisms it is, or failing that a local natural history society that might be able to have a look for you.
The jist of this message is just that the species in question is tricky (or might be impossible) to identify from photos of it in the field.
If you have photographed it but haven't kept the specimen then the record will be verified as normal, but there is a reasonable chance that the record might get rejected as unable to verify.
If you have actually collected a specimen then if you know (for example from a key or internet resource) what part needs to be checked then you could do that yourself and photograph the relevant bits. If you were not sure what to look for, don't have a microscope etc. then the best thing to do would be to get in touch with your local county recorder for whatever group of organisms it is, or failing that a local natural history society that might be able to have a look for you.