Mentioned in #25: many of the descriptions are related to a specific distribution.
Rather expressing this information in the description extension:
taxonid
description
type
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Established
degree of establishment
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Cape Greco to Cape Andreas
region of first record
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Dispersed
vector
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Red Sea
donor area
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Unknown
impact on ecology
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Known
impact on use
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1 - Canals
pathway
I think it will be more readable to express these in context with the distribution in occurrenceRemarks:
taxonid
locationID
locality
...
occurrenceRemarks
100035
TDWG:CYP | IHO23_4:M3.1
Cyprus | Mediterranean Sea
...
population_status: established | region_of_first_record: Cape Greco to Cape Andreas | current_distribution: NA | vector: unintentional | donor_region: red sea | impact_on_ecology: unknown | impact_on_use: known | pathway: canals
Mentioned in #25: many of the descriptions are related to a specific distribution.
Rather expressing this information in the description extension:
I think it will be more readable to express these in context with the distribution in occurrenceRemarks: