Need for more clarifications - Githubissues

forc-db / GROA

This repository houses data and code for the Global Reforestation Opportunity Assessment (GROA) led by Susan Cook-Patton of the Nature Conservancy.

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

31 stars 10 forks source link

Need for more clarifications #2

Closed ValentineHerr closed 4 years ago

ValentineHerr commented 6 years ago

@teixeirak,

[x] Column tropical.extratropical (referenced in variable mapping doc) doesn't seem to exist anymore in SITES of ForC. Did you want to bring it back?
[x] sand.silt.clay in GROA measurements is sometimes a character string like "ckay", "loamy", "sandy loam, sandy silt loam", along with values like "45:30:25"... How should those character strings be dealt with? That can also be a question for @CookPatton.

I'll keep posting things here as I go.

teixeirak commented 6 years ago

Please do not resuscitate tropical.extratropical.

Soil texture descriptions can go in soil.texture.

ValentineHerr commented 6 years ago

@CookPatton, I believe you have not "pushed" all data like you mentioned in your email last Friday. The latest that is in “example data” was last updated 13 days ago and that is when Krista first uploaded it. Can you try to see if you could get the latest version of all data up there? It is mostly so that I can link up measurements and site tables using site.ID. There are not all in both right now. Let me know if you need help with GitHub.

CookPatton commented 6 years ago

@ValentineHerr I think data are now available. Let me know if you continue having issues.

CookPatton commented 6 years ago

@ValentineHerr soil texture are presented as given in papers. ##:##:## refers to sand:silt:clay percentage. So ::40 indicates no number for sand or silt, and 40% for clay. Otherwise I typed in the description given (e.g., clay or loamy). Ckay is a typo and should be clay.

teixeirak commented 6 years ago

@CookPatton, the data are there; thank you. I'm deleting the old example excel file (from May), as its now obsolete.

ValentineHerr commented 6 years ago

@CookPatton , a lot of the variables described in the metadata file are gone now. Is that normal?

CookPatton commented 6 years ago

@ValentineHerr no, that's a mistake. I removed soil data from that table since it was accounted for elsewhere, but in my haste I forgot to add back columns I had removed for ease of analysis. I'll fix and push a more complete option.

CookPatton commented 6 years ago

@ValentineHerr non soil data are up. You can delete the older version and may want to rename "treebiomass.csv" to non-soil since it does include litter.

teixeirak commented 6 years ago

@CookPatton, could you please provide an update on the meaning of the refor.type codes?

CookPatton commented 6 years ago

@teixeirak, SNR refers to spontaneous natural regeneration. Those are the reforesting stands. The other codes indicate current land use of non-forest area or recent disturbance of forest. They all have a stand age of zero because they are "reference" conditions and not reforesting stands themselves. PA = pasture, C = crop, SC = shifting cultivation, H = harvest, F = fire.

teixeirak commented 6 years ago

@CookPatton, are all disturbances that you include stand-clearing? It looks like some were not (e.g., Luquillo).

CookPatton commented 6 years ago

When selecting a paper I tried to focus on those that were stand-clearing. For example, I excluded anything that described "selective logging." However, often this information is not provided and there are some where there is high initial biomass in a presumably new stand. For that reason, in my analysis I did not include any of the tree biomass data from age zero stands, which eliminated many (potentially all) of the problems.

teixeirak commented 6 years ago

Thanks! I assume the natural disturbances are more likely to not be stand-clearing? Or at least that all the others could be categorized as severe?