While we're working on the new Litter format proposal for DOME, a submitter wants to deliver data in water and sediment asap, and needs codes as follows
| Progress and code | Description | Comment_AO | Comment_TW
-- | -- | -- | -- | --
LTPRP or PARAM ot TYPPL (see comment in right-hand column) | Done LTREF H01 + H01 code for foam| Expanded cellular plastic | I expect shapes to be further discussed at the WGML-2023, but they seemed quite redundant related to the litter categories and material type | I agree, simple shape descriptions like "rectangle", "triangle", "sub-irregular", dont seem useful. Maybe the descriptive codes I have requested here should not be shape/SHP codes, but some kind of morphological descriptions that distinguish the type of microlitter, and can be recorded from basic analysis with a light microscope. For example "preproduction pellet","film", "expanded cellular plastic", "synthetic sponge", "foam", "filament >50 um thick", "micro fibre <50um thick", seem relevant for linking microlitter to its source.
" | Done: PARAM LT253 | Waxy semisolid | | To distinguish the fraction of paraffin-like particles, important in North Sea/Skagerrak.
" | cancelled/changed - to be reported with H01 code for pre-prod pellets and SIZCL | Pre-production pellet (<1mm) | | For smaller, often irregularly shaped, preproduction powders, often referred to as fluff, Karlsson et al. (2018). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X18300523
" | E.g. "TAC1", "TAC2", "TAC3". Done: PARAM LT253 | consider codes for tactile characteristics such as "semisolid" | I expect tactile characteristics to be further discussed at the WGML-2023 | Yes, would be good if they would include tactile characteristics for the new format. For this submission, an important aspect of the GU Byfjorded water data is a substantial proportion of micro-paraffin particles in most/all samples. Is there a way that these can be distinguished from the more usual, harder, thermoplastics? Would it work for example to create a LTPRP or PARAM code (e.g. SHP6 for "waxy semisolid") to avoid loss of information for this submission?
MATRIX | E.g. "SEDfrac". DONE: new codes for specific fractions are offered, also MATRX SEDtot + METPT SVW | "Sediment" or "Size fractionated sediment" | Please check if any of these work for you, and let me know if more codes need to be added | None of the existing codes, such as those you listed with specific grain sizes, would work, as the size classes do not match those in the datasets from either of the two universities. However, I am a bit confused now, as when I searched for MATRX options within LT, I found only BE, SF, WC, and SF. I think I also got an issue raised by DATSU related to invalid MATRX codes for LT. Should I just record SF in the MATRX column, or can a more appropriate code be created and used such a "sediment" (our sediment could be described as "size fractionated sediment")? A code like this might be widely applicable to diverse microlitter submitters.
LTSZC | Done. 38 | microns 100-299 | Would you like me to create these size categories or follow the EMODnet/TGML recommendations for standardized size categories reporting? | Adil discussed as standard (from OSPAR?) at WKLIDA. Yes, please create for GU sed and water datasets
LTSZC | Done. 39 | microns 300-999 | | Adil discussed as standard (from OSPAR?) at WKLIDA. Yes, please create for GU sed and water datasets
LTSZC | Done. 40 | 1 mm-5 mm | | Adil discussed as standard (from OSPAR?) at WKLIDA. Yes, please create for GU sed and water datasets
LTSZC | Done. 41 | microns 50-299 | | Non-standard but needed for ORU sediment and water datasets
LTSZC | Done. 42 | microns 300-5000 | | Non-standard but needed for ORU sediment and water datasets
LTSZC | Done. 18 | 5 mm-25 mm | | Not discussed at WKLIDA but needed for a few records within the GU datasets, if they are not to be excluded. 5-25 mm was proposed for mesolitter by Kroon et al., 2018 (Nature).
MUNIT | Done (partially). items/kg | items/kg (dry weight) sediment | Dry weight will be covered by BASIS, sediment is covered by MATRX. Items/g exists already, items/kg can be added | OK, then just items/kg should work. Then I just need to add a column titled BASIS with the code D, or?
TYPPL | Cancelled. AC | akrylglas/perspex | Request should be sent to EMODnet Chem/TGML as well for adding an H05 category | Could a DOME code be created for the current submission?
TYPPL | Done. PES | Polyester | Ok to add |
METPT | Cancelled. SVW| Size fractionated | | Useful to describe pretreatment of sediment samples. I can leave this column blank.
METCX | Done. ALDKNC | "KOH + NaOCl digestion of biogenic matter" | Right now, variety of digestion methods is added to the METCX. If WGML suggests moving it to METPT for plastics, we’ll look at it with MCWG as well. | You are right, I should have been looking in METCX, not METPT. As also suggested by Adil in his sediment spreadsheet, it would be useful to have a METCX code for digestion using a mixture of KOH and NaOCl (Strand & Tairova, 2016). e.g. "KOH + NaOCl digestion" (we call it Strand solution).
While we're working on the new Litter format proposal for DOME, a submitter wants to deliver data in water and sediment asap, and needs codes as follows
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
| Progress and code | Description | Comment_AO | Comment_TW -- | -- | -- | -- | -- LTPRP or PARAM ot TYPPL (see comment in right-hand column) | Done LTREF H01 + H01 code for foam| Expanded cellular plastic | I expect shapes to be further discussed at the WGML-2023, but they seemed quite redundant related to the litter categories and material type | I agree, simple shape descriptions like "rectangle", "triangle", "sub-irregular", dont seem useful. Maybe the descriptive codes I have requested here should not be shape/SHP codes, but some kind of morphological descriptions that distinguish the type of microlitter, and can be recorded from basic analysis with a light microscope. For example "preproduction pellet","film", "expanded cellular plastic", "synthetic sponge", "foam", "filament >50 um thick", "micro fibre <50um thick", seem relevant for linking microlitter to its source. " | Done: PARAM LT253 | Waxy semisolid | | To distinguish the fraction of paraffin-like particles, important in North Sea/Skagerrak. " | cancelled/changed - to be reported with H01 code for pre-prod pellets and SIZCL | Pre-production pellet (<1mm) | | For smaller, often irregularly shaped, preproduction powders, often referred to as fluff, Karlsson et al. (2018). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X18300523 " | E.g. "TAC1", "TAC2", "TAC3". Done: PARAM LT253 | consider codes for tactile characteristics such as "semisolid" | I expect tactile characteristics to be further discussed at the WGML-2023 | Yes, would be good if they would include tactile characteristics for the new format. For this submission, an important aspect of the GU Byfjorded water data is a substantial proportion of micro-paraffin particles in most/all samples. Is there a way that these can be distinguished from the more usual, harder, thermoplastics? Would it work for example to create a LTPRP or PARAM code (e.g. SHP6 for "waxy semisolid") to avoid loss of information for this submission? MATRIX | E.g. "SEDfrac". DONE: new codes for specific fractions are offered, also MATRX SEDtot + METPT SVW | "Sediment" or "Size fractionated sediment" | Please check if any of these work for you, and let me know if more codes need to be added | None of the existing codes, such as those you listed with specific grain sizes, would work, as the size classes do not match those in the datasets from either of the two universities. However, I am a bit confused now, as when I searched for MATRX options within LT, I found only BE, SF, WC, and SF. I think I also got an issue raised by DATSU related to invalid MATRX codes for LT. Should I just record SF in the MATRX column, or can a more appropriate code be created and used such a "sediment" (our sediment could be described as "size fractionated sediment")? A code like this might be widely applicable to diverse microlitter submitters. LTSZC | Done. 38 | microns 100-299 | Would you like me to create these size categories or follow the EMODnet/TGML recommendations for standardized size categories reporting? | Adil discussed as standard (from OSPAR?) at WKLIDA. Yes, please create for GU sed and water datasets LTSZC | Done. 39 | microns 300-999 | | Adil discussed as standard (from OSPAR?) at WKLIDA. Yes, please create for GU sed and water datasets LTSZC | Done. 40 | 1 mm-5 mm | | Adil discussed as standard (from OSPAR?) at WKLIDA. Yes, please create for GU sed and water datasets LTSZC | Done. 41 | microns 50-299 | | Non-standard but needed for ORU sediment and water datasets LTSZC | Done. 42 | microns 300-5000 | | Non-standard but needed for ORU sediment and water datasets LTSZC | Done. 18 | 5 mm-25 mm | | Not discussed at WKLIDA but needed for a few records within the GU datasets, if they are not to be excluded. 5-25 mm was proposed for mesolitter by Kroon et al., 2018 (Nature). MUNIT | Done (partially). items/kg | items/kg (dry weight) sediment | Dry weight will be covered by BASIS, sediment is covered by MATRX. Items/g exists already, items/kg can be added | OK, then just items/kg should work. Then I just need to add a column titled BASIS with the code D, or? TYPPL | Cancelled. AC | akrylglas/perspex | Request should be sent to EMODnet Chem/TGML as well for adding an H05 category | Could a DOME code be created for the current submission? TYPPL | Done. PES | Polyester | Ok to add | METPT | Cancelled. SVW| Size fractionated | | Useful to describe pretreatment of sediment samples. I can leave this column blank. METCX | Done. ALDKNC | "KOH + NaOCl digestion of biogenic matter" | Right now, variety of digestion methods is added to the METCX. If WGML suggests moving it to METPT for plastics, we’ll look at it with MCWG as well. | You are right, I should have been looking in METCX, not METPT. As also suggested by Adil in his sediment spreadsheet, it would be useful to have a METCX code for digestion using a mixture of KOH and NaOCl (Strand & Tairova, 2016). e.g. "KOH + NaOCl digestion" (we call it Strand solution).