search

trias-project / alien-plants-belgium

🌿 Manual of the Alien Plants of Belgium
https://trias-project.github.io/alien-plants-belgium
MIT License
0 stars 1 forks source link

Ignore mode of introduction (M/I) #17

Open peterdesmet opened 7 years ago

peterdesmet commented 7 years ago

Does not seem to contain more useful information (Deliberate / Accidental) than V/I, so we'll ignore this in the mapping.

@qgroom is that correct?

qgroom commented 7 years ago

yes, that's fine

peterdesmet commented 7 years ago

Please discuss with Filip if it's actually worth keeping M/I. Doesn'tV/I (Food refuse, Hort.) already imply accidental vs deliberate?

peterdesmet commented 7 years ago

We will ignore this column and rely on V/I

timadriaens commented 7 years ago

we need to cross check first whether there are any non-release/escape pathways listed as accidental and vice versa

LienReyserhove commented 4 years ago

I quickly inspected the mapped data, and I think that we should include the information included in m_i after all. An example of our mapping of v_i into pathway information, with extra information of m_i:

m_i v_i cbd_standard
D Birdseed contaminant_seed
A/D Hort., timber? contaminant_timber

The CBD category contaminant is associated with unintentional release (see Saul et al.). Based on this information, we should think that the mode of introduction was accidental. However, the raw dataset specifies that it could also be an deliberate introduction. We are thus missing some information, although these cases are rather rare. @timadriaens ?

timadriaens commented 4 years ago

This is the agreed framework of Harrower et al. on deliberate versus accidental introductions linked to the CBD pathway classification, which we also use for the TrIAS pathway indicators:

2020-04-20 12_04_56-TSSR-2016-010CBDcategoriesonpathwaysFinal pdf

Of course, this is very crude and so MAP has more detailed information. M/I also contains a value "H": this refers to hybrids and does not say anything about intentionality actually unless the hybrid is of cultivated origin. So it is a bit of a mess actually with different kinds of information in there.

I suggest we keep this in the checklist but not for the unified (there, we base entirely on v_i) @LienReyserhove ?

qgroom commented 4 years ago

My preference on this would be to get Filip to adopt the CBD pathway categories, but I don't know if he would be up for it.

timadriaens commented 4 years ago

Indeed, or he can keep working like he's used to but include a mapped field himself. Also, it would be good if he could keep the regional information on introduction dates etc. We might have a jobber this summer who could do that for the current MAP version so that we can provide him with that.