mslarae13
commented
3 years ago Correct: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NrTWTWV39nqvy4ftq3LLQu9rF0dHBsZ-/view?usp=sharing Updated columns: J, P, T, U --Depth, column T, is in meters. centimeters would be better, and needs a range value like Brodie. See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1in7uAM9CjCu-5vr572hr-MoIyjDwOaP-4yry72V1MFU/edit?usp=sharing -- There are a few follow up questions -- Most important, relates to the sand mesocosms. I'm not sure if there were treatments applied to these that wasn't captured.
@mslarae13 and I met with James today to review his data in the portal.
Sample names that are longer and contain a "T" such as: _Groundwater microbial communities from the Columbia River, Washington, USA, for microbe roles in carbon and contaminant biogeochemistry - GW-RW metaG T330-Apr-14 are sand samples that have been sterilized in the lab per methods here then incubated back in the ground as "sand packs" and collected at various time points. This is distinct from other samples in this dataset are "native" sediment samples.
Sample names with "N" as in _Groundwater microbial communities from the Columbia River, Washington, USA - GW-RW N3_1020 did not come from areas with vegetation. Samples with "S" as in _Groundwater microbial communities from the Columbia River, Washington, USA - GW-RW S2_0010 had a lot of vegetation nearby. Can we modify the EnvO terms for these samples to more accurately reflect these features? @jagadishcs (these features are part of the science story)
James also mentioned that all samples should have distinct lat/lon values as they were sampled across space and time.
James mentioned a spreadsheet that he shared before GSP that should already have all of these details in them. Please share the link here @mslarae13. Thanks!