search

International-Soil-Radiocarbon-Database / ISRaD

Repository for the development and release of ISRaD data and tools
https://international-soil-radiocarbon-database.github.io/ISRaD/
24 stars 15 forks source link

Depth convention inconsistencies #176

Closed alkalifly closed 5 years ago

alkalifly commented 5 years ago

I have been noticing a number of profiles with organic horizons that have a positive depth. If I've understood the decisions in #2 correctly, then I believe these layers should have negative depths. See, for example, Dümig_2008, Gentsch_2018, and O'Donnell_2011.

Going forward, we should definitely make sure that the expert review considers this. I'm not sure what to do about the existing entries, aside from checking them all one by one and fixing them manually.

jb388 commented 5 years ago

Thanks for pointing this out, Paul. Two points: 1) We should make sure this is explicitly stated as a component of the expert review process (I assume most of us are looking for this already, though) 2) Keep in mind the "lyr_all_org_neg" flag. For example, the Gentsch_2018 paper uses this convention.

The only issues I see with the papers you mentioned are the Oa layers in the Dümig paper (the Oi/Oe are entered as negatives). Aside from that I don't see an issue.

jb388 commented 5 years ago

FYI I pushed an updated version of Dümig_2008 to git just now.

alkalifly commented 5 years ago

Thanks @jb388 for fixing Düming_2008.

I'm still a little confused about Gentsch_2018; I see that the lyr_all_org_neg is entered as yes, but many of lyr_hzn entries look like A, B, and C horizons, which suggests mineral soil to me, but perhaps I am just not understanding the nomenclature.

I'm even more confused by O'Donnell_2011, which seems to comprise only a single profile, and has both organic and mineral layers that seem to overlap in depth, all of which are entered as positive depths, but not all of which are below the organic-mineral interface.

jb388 commented 5 years ago

@alkalifly The Gentsch data was very confusing as it was all from permafrost sites with varied active layer depths. For example, the "Ajj" horizons have descriptions like, "less decomposed material", which to me indicates an organic horizon. I think accurate depth reporting is an endemic problem for permafrost sites, and I'm not sure how best to represent them.

O'Donnell looks to me like only the mineral horizons were reported, but maybe I misinterpreted the data. Perhaps ask Kate H. about that directly?

alkalifly commented 5 years ago

@jb388 Okay, it turned out there was some confusing stuff going on with O'Donnell, but Kate and I worked everything out.