Closed liyawang closed 2 years ago
Hi Liya - thanks for your interest. Note that these results come from:
Even then, it is surprising that the two values for 2018 are so different. @NewcombMaria can you confirm that these two measurements are correct?
For reference, I can access these results using the API: https://terraref.org/bety/api/v1/search?cultivar=PI156217&trait=aboveground_dry_biomass&key=YOURSECRETKEYHERE
or database: select sitename, city, cultivar, treatment, mean, raw_date, units from traits_and_yields_view where cultivar = 'PI156217' and trait = 'aboveground_dry_biomass';
sitename | city | cultivar | treatment | mean | raw_date | units |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MAC Field Scanner Season 4 Range 4 Column 7 | Maricopa | PI156217 | MAC Season 4: BAP water-deficit stress Aug 1-14 | 17810 | 2017-09-12 05:00:00 | kg / ha |
Clemson University Pee Dee Research and Education Center | Florence | PI156217 | 2014 Clemson BAP Phenotyping Trials | 30800 | 2014-10-12 00:00:00 | kg / ha |
MAC Field Scanner Season 6 Range 34 Column 8 | Maricopa | PI156217 | MAC Season 6: Sorghum | 15200 | 2018-08-01 07:00:00 | kg / ha |
MAC Field Scanner Season 4 Range 34 Column 10 | Maricopa | PI156217 | MAC Season 4: BAP water-deficit stress Aug 15-30 | 23210 | 2017-09-15 05:00:00 | kg / ha |
MAC Field Scanner Season 6 Range 6 Column 10 | Maricopa | PI156217 | MAC Season 6: Sorghum | 8540 | 2018-07-31 07:00:00 | kg / ha |
I am trying to extract the Terra-REF trait data to run GWAS on biomass. So I extracted “aboveground_dry_biomass” but found that the values are quite different for the same line (see below).
Even for 2018, the values are 15200 vs 8540. I noticed that there are other biomass trait data. Do you think it is necessary to normalize these values to other traits or I can simply take the average for 2018? For GWAS, I need to compare traits against all BAP lines.