Unfolding: Project 64 (Brunswick Co. NC): 88 plots
this data needs to be processed and added to the (v2006) central archive
#2 Updated by Michael Lee almost 15 years ago
I resolved 3 errors associated with species list and "sp." in the "unknown sp." line. 8 errors are due to plot lacking X-axis bearing. If these aren't in the datasheets, they will never be known, I fear, as it's hard to remember that. Not a significant error in any case.
This leaves 43 errors.
#3 Updated by Michael Lee almost 15 years ago
of the 43 errors, only 8 are not dealing with a plot that has no trees. The database flags these as errors, but likely none of these plots has errors.
8 errors remain:
1) 064-01-0950 lacks height definitions for strata: make some up?
2) 064-01-0951 has only one stratum (herb) but no height definitions: easy to make some up, I'd think. It's a Southern Atlantic Coastal Plain Depression Pondshore.
3) fixed issue of entry: strata were listed, but no values filled in got flagged
4) 064-04-0960 had 3 species, but no plot-subSapl or plot-subTree was set: probably 100% can be filled in for them. It's not dense; no need to subsample.
5) 064-04-0971 had intensive modules 1,2 and 3, but module 3 showed no species present- I think it was skipped b/c it's a 3 module plot and has an R module. So 3 should be deleted and R is just module 3.
6) entry issue with strata once again, resolved.
7) 064-02-0960 has no total cover % estimated for strata: just ignore this.
8) 064-08-0954 has Morella cerifera present in module 3 and R module, too. Forbes could check the original datasheet to see if there is an explanation. IF not, we could just remove its presence in R.
#5 Updated by Forbes Boyle almost 15 years ago
(In reply to comment #4)
Now just 2 issues left:
a) whether or not to make up stratum definitions where lacking (2 plots). MTL
leans toward leaving null.
b) making sure the present in module 3 and R module is not a missing species
Morella cerifera is present in module 3, and there is NOT a missing species for the R module---simply a data entry mishap. FB
#8 Updated by Michael Lee almost 15 years ago
plot 064-09-0960 has no communities linked into it, but two classification attempts, it would appear, one with Fair fit and low Confidence, the next with Good fit and Medium confidence. What community names were listed? None listed in the notes section.
Working on unfolded these data.