ForestGEO-wide dendrometer band data issues

[teixeirak]

Here's a running list of dendro band data issues to consider with the broader group:

1. do we stick with this data format (developed by Rick Condit, modified by @mcgregorian1) as a general template for ForestGEO? If so, it needs some adjustments. If not, define new format.

   Issues with [Rick's data format] include:

   • calculated DBH values (data sheets have mix of raw and calculated values, as opposed to limiting data set to raw data). If this is to be ForestGEO standard, the implication is that it is essential to run an R script in order to get the data into standard format.
   • clunky treatment of band data (see my comment in Questions #6, question 5.)
   • some fields are never used at some sites (e.g., lianas in temperate sites) or used only once (e.g., type plastic or metal) --> clutter
   • some fields never used at SCBI (dir, measureID) --> more clutter
     ...

2. standardizing canopy position classes (see clarify "crown" and "illum" fields  #9). In brief: SCBI has used crown position classification system that differs from ForestGEO protocol for some measurements (mort census, not dendro bands. Now working to rectify). I believe SERC also has used a different classification system.

[mcgregorian1]

Hi @teixeirak I'm wondering if we can close this?

[teixeirak]

Let's leave this open for future reference. I've changed title to make it more clear what this is about, and un-tagged you.

[mcgregorian1]

Ok! sounds good