search

tmesaglio / Australian-plant-photos

2 stars 1 forks source link

main driver 3 - growth habit #20

Open tmesaglio opened 2 years ago

tmesaglio commented 2 years ago

@wcornwell @eflowerproject thanks to Lizzy who sent me the Austraits doc, I rustled up the numbers for unphotographed growth habit. Needs a little bit of cleaning, but results are pretty clear

image

wcornwell commented 2 years ago

Could also be expressed as proportion/percent?

tmesaglio commented 2 years ago

yeah for sure, this wasn't my final figure or anything, just the basic/automatic output from the code

tmesaglio commented 2 years ago

I'm very surprised at how few trees there are

wcornwell commented 2 years ago

no epiphytes?

tmesaglio commented 2 years ago

I'm chatting to Lizzy on Tuesday about these definitions/categories. I assume epiphytes have been lumped under one of the other categories (e.g., grasses are classed as herbs under this scheme, and aquatic herbs just become herbs)

tmesaglio commented 2 years ago

also the 'missing' category is cycads, but for some reason they got changed to missing between the original column and the 'cleaned' one (in the original file, not from my cleaning)

eflowerproject commented 2 years ago

Interesting new results!

FYI not in love with the raw breakdown of growth habits in the data you received from Lizzy. I'll need to talk to her and David today to understand better what they did (what is a herb_primitive???) but I suspect you'll need to transform / simplify to make sense of it. I was also interested to see in the Klimes et al. paper we are discussing next week that they removed epiphytes by default from their analyses because they could not categorise them as either woody or herbaceous.

On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 at 23:43, Thomas Mesaglio @.***> wrote:

also the 'missing' category is cycads, but for some reason they got listed as missing from the original column to the 'cleaned' one (in the original file, not from my cleaning)

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/tmesaglio/Australian-plant-photos/issues/20#issuecomment-1111021275, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANDLDALMZI2URIUVHXFCYCTVHFABFANCNFSM5UNXXECA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

-- Dr Hervé Sauquet (he/him) Senior Research Scientist (Systematic Botanist) Australian Institute of Botanical Science, Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust Locked Bag 6002, Mount Annan, NSW 2567, Australia E-mail: @. (or @.) Tel: +61 410 798 181 (mobile) www.eflower.org | www.sauquetlab.org | RBGDT profile https://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/Science/Our-science-staff/Dr-Herve-Sauquet

Senior Visiting Fellow, University of New South Wales https://www.unsw.edu.au/ Vice-President, Australasian Systematic Botany Society http://www.asbs.org.au/ Associate Editor, Frontiers in Plant Science https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/sections/plant-systematics-and-evolution | International Journal of Plant Sciences https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/journals/ijps/about | Taxon http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/iapt/tax

tmesaglio commented 2 years ago

Interesting new results! FYI not in love with the raw breakdown of growth habits in the data you received from Lizzy. I'll need to talk to her and David today to understand better what they did (what is a herb_primitive???) but I suspect you'll need to transform / simplify to make sense of it. I was also interested to see in the Klimes et al. paper we are discussing next week that they removed epiphytes by default from their analyses because they could not categorise them as either woody or herbaceous.

I've got a zoom call lined up with Lizzy for 10 am Tuesday next week to discuss exactly this, so you're also more than welcome to join that if you wanted.

fyi herb_primitive is club mosses