search

nowcommunity / NOW-Data

Data related to the NOW databse
MIT License
0 stars 0 forks source link

Australia Riversleigh and major update (Kenny and Christine) #150

Open karilint opened 5 months ago

karilint commented 5 months ago

The new Australian coordinator Kenny T promised to suggest how to approach revising Riversleigh

karilint commented 5 months ago

Activity Show details Write a comment… indre.zliobaite Apr 3, 2023 2:28 PM Christine is coming to Helsinki in May, will see.

Reply • Delete indre.zliobaite Jan 22, 2023 1:54 PM New sources from Kenny

Reply • Delete indre.zliobaite Oct 23, 2019 3:37 PM Hi Kenny,

Thanks! This is a good question. Technically, the NOW database allows either kind. The Faunal Zones of Riversleigh would be recognised as "general localities", something primarily used for old collections that predate the later spatial and stratigraphic refinement. Most classic localities (Samos, Olduvai, etc.) have this kind and I've no doubt you have such material for Riversleigh as well. Type specimens from the early days of palaeontology are almost always referable only to such general localities.

Scientifically, the individual localities are preferable for several reasons, including aspects of data analysis. And of course you can always aggregate afterwards, whereas undoing the aggregates is very hard to do.

For North America we actually have aggregates similar to your (spatially local) Faunal Zones, which means that when we find interesting differences between North America and Eurasia (for example) we always have to think hard about whether they could be due to different levels of data aggregation. What we don't accept as localities is temporal aggregates with more than local extent, for example country-wide zonations.

It's of course also a matter of practicality and ultimately down to the coordinator in charge, in this case you. You have the best knowledge and overview to decide. If you'd like to discuss you can tell us more, for example how far apart the individual localities are and how widely spaced in time.

Cheers!

Mikael

On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 05:26, Kenny Travouillon Kenny.Travouillon@museum.wa.gov.au wrote:

Hi,

Actually, when I started, Riversleigh was a single site in the database, and I managed to split it into the 4 Faunal Zones. Are you expecting all the Riversleigh sites to be added, rather than the Riversleigh Faunal Zones? There are over 300 sites at Riversleigh, and most haven't been dated or associated to a Faunal Zone, so I am not so keen to go down to site specifics. Are you happy with just the 4 Faunal Zones?

Kind regards,

Dr Kenny J. Travouillon CF Curator of Mammalogy / Chair of Australasian Palaeontologists Terrestrial Zoology

karilint commented 5 months ago

Riversleigh Species presence Data.xlsx Archer et al., 2006 (better version).pdf Klinkhamer & Godthelp 2015 Two new species of fossil Leggadina from NW Qld. PeerJ.pdf