The datasets can have hundreds or thousands of species. It is difficult to pick from a dropdown menu.
Users do not know each individual species, unless the person running the app is the expert local botanist. Students, colleagues, postdocs, etc. have no clue.
Because of the large quantity of options, this is a step essentially impossible to reproduce in practice (unless the selection of pioneers is stored in the profile).
Using genera instead of species may help making the dropdown menu easier, and also removes some variability in the user choices.
Another alternative is to search for wood density in the global wood density database or something similar, make guesses based on species (then genus, then family, then stand), and using some pre-defined threshold or rule inside the app. This goes in the direction of not allowing the user much flexibility through the app. Users that require flexibility can still do things outside the app. The app, as a data federation tool, is used by users that do not have clear goals with the corrections, and can make rather arbitrary choices. We cannot expect [consensuated criteria] + [perfect communication] between the different teams or individuals sharing data.
The datasets can have hundreds or thousands of species. It is difficult to pick from a dropdown menu.
Users do not know each individual species, unless the person running the app is the expert local botanist. Students, colleagues, postdocs, etc. have no clue.
Because of the large quantity of options, this is a step essentially impossible to reproduce in practice (unless the selection of pioneers is stored in the profile).
Using genera instead of species may help making the dropdown menu easier, and also removes some variability in the user choices.
Another alternative is to search for wood density in the global wood density database or something similar, make guesses based on species (then genus, then family, then stand), and using some pre-defined threshold or rule inside the app. This goes in the direction of not allowing the user much flexibility through the app. Users that require flexibility can still do things outside the app. The app, as a data federation tool, is used by users that do not have clear goals with the corrections, and can make rather arbitrary choices. We cannot expect [consensuated criteria] + [perfect communication] between the different teams or individuals sharing data.