Behaviour=7 that should be behaviour=22

[martinig]

These are possible records that could be considered as mating chases (might be worth changing the coding).

new_beh <- tbl(con, "behaviour") %>% 
    collect() %>%
    filter(behaviour==22 | id %in% c(1059, 3133, 3282, 3600, 13747, 23017, 30563, 49749, 49807, 49908, 49910, 50564, 50798, 50799, 50800, 50810, 50812, 50817, 51019, 52355, 53410, 78033, 78239, 78253, 78335, 78936, 79142, 79477, 80334, 80924, 95969, 96167, 96376, 96480, 97442, 97632, 104553, 104563, 104572, 104943, 104965, 104999, 105722, 106137, 106138, 106206, 106864, 107274, 107567, 107568, 107746, 107748, 108034, 108258, 109073, 109110, 109657, 120601, 120703, 121142, 125998, 126008, 126048, 126157, 127504, 131378, 131391, 182890, 183025, 183041, 184170, 184454, 184485, 184636, 184637, 375671, 382716, 384671, 384673, 389904, 389989, 410883))
  
old_beh <- tbl(con, "dbabehaviour") %>% 
    collect() %>%
    group_by(squirrel_id, date) %>%
    filter(beh==22 | id %in% c(13747, 23017, 49626, 49908, 50564, 50731, 52355, 53410, 78003, 78033, 78133, 78239, 78253, 78335, 78752, 78808, 78936, 79142, 79477, 80334, 80924, 95969, 96167, 96376, 96425, 96480, 97249, 97442, 97632, 104553, 104563, 104572, 104965, 104999, 105722, 106137, 106138, 106206, 106864, 107274, 107567, 107746, 107748, 108713, 109073, 109110, 109657, 120601, 120703, 121142))

[agmcadam]

I need more information to be able to do anything with this information. What is the current coding and what is the justification that the coding should be changed?

[martinig]

Right, so I have been working on pulling out mating chase data for Sean Bishop and Lia. In one of the email threads, you had suggested that I check the behaviour==7 records to see if there were mating chases hidden in there. I read all the comments and this is how I figured out these behaviour==7 might be worth re-coding to behaviour==22 behaviours given that is how I am using them for Sean's stuff.

Not at all necessary, but might be worth it for Lia/future students.