Publication of Runes strandskjell data

[rukayaj]

Making an issue for this:

5 files (3 pdf, excel) Data in Excel, species occurrences Plots distributed across the location Location as dwc:Location identified e.g. by a GeoNames ID ?? Each plot should be a site but there is no site concept in Darwin Core, can MAYBE use dwc:fieldNumber with a prefix for the plot and a post-fix for the plot visit ?? Each visit to each plot → event as dwc:Event identified by UUID as dwc:eventID Each species recorded → separate species occurrence as dwc:Occurrence identified by UUID as dwc:occerrenceID

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1L3MMMhSkzgXiJ1UkIfp2KvzitTnlLCIz

[dagendresen]

Bjørn Petter har lagt datafilene i Goggle Drive mappen.

[rukayaj]

I'm looking at the first row in "Occurrences for import" https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CHroJ_yvVx6iVq3M2H_agGd_DsxvN-VD/edit#gid=62823595

"Juniperus communis" has "5" in coverShrubsInPercentage - does this mean that Juniperus communis was covering 50% - 100% of the 1m2 for this particular vegetation plot?

If so then I think we should put '5' in a new field for organismQuantity https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:organismQuantity and 'Hult Sernander Du Rietz scale' for https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:organismQuantityType . Then we would collapse all of these columns into organismQuantity: coverShrubsInPercentage coverHerbsInPercentage coverMossesInPercentage coverLichensInPercentage

If we do it the other way and use e.g. coverShrubsInPercentage (https://rs.gbif.org/extension/gbif/1.0/releve_2016-05-10.xml) I am not sure how we express ranges, it says it should be percentage rounded to 2 decimal places. Also, we have the percentage cover per species, so I think it's actually better to publish organismQuantity rather than the releve extension fields where you don't specify individual species.

[rukayaj]

I will put this in an email to BP as I guess he's not checking github :)

[dagendresen]

I tried to help him onto GitHub yesterday - but the user registration was one step more than he had the patience for. I was desperately missing a simpler login directly with ORCID directly at registration ;-) I think that would have made the trick. But first registering and then linking to ORCID proved to be one step too much :-D

[rukayaj]

If we can show him some fun github stats I am sure he will be enthusiastic! Anyway this is published now on zenodo and gbif https://www.gbif.org/dataset/0db86a4c-5b10-4a39-b81d-15e1525bb27f. I added the zenodo doi as an alternative identifier, i'm not sure if we want that or we want an actual GBIF doi?

[rukayaj]

@MichalTorma and I are changing it so there is:

• A) one zenodo upload + DOI for the actual PDF publication
• B) another zenodo upload + DOI for the original dataset xlsx + supplementary PDFs
• C) one GBIF dataset + GBIF DOI for the GBIF dataset

The other publication identifiers we found are: https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/2gq2l8/BIBSYS_ILS71644346270002201 http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=PASCAL8110085421

[rukayaj]

A) one zenodo upload + DOI for the actual PDF publication = 10.5281/zenodo.6759460 B) another zenodo upload + DOI for the original dataset xlsx + supplementary PDFs = 10.5281/zenodo.6759176 C) one GBIF dataset + GBIF DOI for the GBIF dataset = 10.15468/p864ew