all project variables came across as null, including a lack of project contributors. My plot is linked to project_ID = 7 in observation table. Perhaps the existance of PROJECT_ID in plot is throwing us here. I can test this theory by referencing to a project in the plot.project_ID field. null null null null 9 VB.mtl-vBr-1.9.harris02@hotmail.com.20020903 mtl-vBr-1 48 33 175432 5341984 17 Perth 3 test data This field should not be viewable by the public. However, the data in this field are correct! should be 42, was empty in export xml should be "(0,0)(0,4),(2,2),(0,0)", was empty in export xml Diffuse 4 extensiveI had "Large (10-100x plot)" for my value. I had "Random" for my value. true I had "triangular to capture correct community" 145 nullI had 20 43.2 42 High slope (shoulder slope, upper slope, convex cr looks like our vegbank topoPosition field is too small! - check geology and landform while we're at it aluvial fan Slope a Modified Deposits: Solifluction, landslide Should no longer be in plot table. nullShould no longer be in plot table. I had "false" for the following three fields, but loading them to empty might make sense, too. NCThis must have been assumed by the loader. I did not reference to NC, unless by chance the coordinates were NC -- no the coordinates are in Kryvyy Rih, Ukraine. Who knew?? USAditto as state, I made no mention of USA in plot data. 2002-09-03 00:00:00-07I had "mtl-vBr-1" unless we have a rule constraining this to a date format (in which case why have the field?) 2002-09-03 00:00:00-07 2002-09-04 00:00:00-07 One month VB.9.20020905154624-07 should not be here should be 1 (actual ID) or otherwise reference the covermethod should be 3 (actual ID) or otherwise reference the stratummethod should be 0.25 Used CVS protocol 4.5 Dispersed-regular trueI had false 8.5 I had "Full census" Vancouver, BC Very thorough (3) fully compliant with recommendations Moderate Moderate but incomplete Low good study, excellent work done should be "red rocks, much like Sedona, AZ" compositional trend across plot vernal vegetation differences from similar sites in area owing to chance dispersal to insular habitats. 45.12 Tidally flooded Xeric Moderately well drained Brackish (0.5-30 ppt) 0.29 17 null0.052 77 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 nineteen Mature, even-age 25% there 85 35 12 2 0.5 35 10 56 20 3 1 Nonvascular Tree fern Palm shrub Aquatic herb 8 6 4 soilTaxonSrc missing from Observation, as well as SoilTaxon_ID (the former had data) false false false ice-plant communityWRONG! There were no classifications assigned to this plot in the upload! E 12 25 12 hrb 1 0.5 25 Other 85 0 17 shb 8 13 4 T53.10 14 12 6 Abies concolor (Gord. and Glend.) Lindl. ex Hildebr. ABCOUnsure of where this code is coming from. There could exist many codes in PlantUsage for this plantName. plantConcepts are referenced in taxonInterpretation -- does it come from that? 44Strangely, this is off. My value was 45. The plug-in must be calculating taxonCover as max(stratumCover). It should use my value if I give one. Ditto for the other taxonCovers for other TaxonObservations. 20This was rounded down from 20.2 hrb 44 shb 29rounded up from 28.7 - ditto for the other taxonStratumCovers T53.10 Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt. var. arizonica (Merriam) Lemmon ABLAA 2 2 E 2 Other 2 shb 2 T53.10 Asteraceae Asteraceae 2 2 hrb Bidens L. BIDEN 65 54 hrb 65 Other 33 T53.10 Bouteloua curtipendula (Michx.) Torr. BOCU Mammillaria Haw. MAMMI 31 31 hrb 12 T53.10