PARTICIPANTS
A total of 21 individuals
(including the key participants listed above) attended all or part of the
workshop. The majority identified themselves as informatics people, but at
least four senior ecologists participated. Attached is a list with contact information to
facilitate future communication.
ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS
In this three-hour workshop,
we described our database, which is comprised of forest structure/function
studies from multiple Principal Investigators. We presented artifacts generated
by our database tools, which include DataBank (a tool for database design) and
CanopyView (a tool for data visualization). We discussed potential uses of
these software tools by LTER researchers and Information Managers, and
determined what needs to be done to make these more useful to the larger
ecological community.
For part of the
workshop, the full group broke into two smaller groups, one to focus on forest
and canopy structure issues, and the other to discuss the informatics work
associated with assessing net primary productivity using LTER databases. The two groups then reported out to the full
group on their results and discussions.
The forest canopy
structure group (5-7 individuals) discussed the value of working with such
a system, and agreed that it was a useful approach. Several examples of forest
space categories were generated from data collected at LUQ. Different types of
coordinate spaces were discussed, noting the multiple ways that a single data
set could be both conceptualized and displayed. The ability to "stack"
other data sets on the original data was worked out. Visualization (or other
representations of data) was viewed as a key part of this process, and as a
powerful reward for using this system.
The cultural aspects of
these issues were also discussed, i.e., how to either give rewards and
incentives to scientists to deposit and share data, or to provide disincentives
NOT to share data. One of the "carrots" that could be offered is the
greater ease with which collaboration and synthesis could occur if the canopy
database and the forest categories were used by individuals and by the research
community.
The grasslands
net primary productivity group (7 individuals) used the preliminary concept
map and knowledge of data at three LTER sites (JRN, SEV, SGS) to develop
preliminary domain models covering relevant data at those sites. The three domain models were later refined
and we determined that they were likely comparable. From those domain models, Databank templates
will be devised and an experiment in integrating these data into one synthetic
data store performed.
NEXT STEPS AND FUTURE COLLABORATIONS
We have organized a follow up
2-day workshop that will be held at the LTER Network office in
We will also continue to interact
with forest researchers in our efforts to categorize canopy structure. We have
a full year of funding from our current National Science Foundation grant to
refine our ideas and build a larger database to support these efforts. We
anticipate that we will apply for a renewal grant (for two subsequent years of
funding) to enhance our canopy database project, particularly aspects of canopy
structure conceptualization, visualization and statistical analysis.
We also anticipate working
closely with SEEK to - cast our canopy structure concepts into formal concept
maps, using tools they have identified as of potential value to ecology. Finally, we hope to work collaboratively with
NCEAS to develop synthetic and integrative work that will grow from our canopy
database activities.
CONCLUSIONS
The LTER All Scientists
Meeting was a valuable venue to disseminate information about the canopy
database project and forest canopy structure categories, and to seek feedback
from ecologists not previously involved in the project. Both the project and
the concept categorizations seemed to appeal to LTER scientists, as the topic
provoked interest and useful feedback. The responses confirmed the PIs
assessment that the use of software components to share, visualize, and analyze
data will be a useful activity to individual scientists and to the forest
ecology research community. Visualization in particular was deemed a most
important draw. The prospect of carrying out synthetic studies more easily also
makes participation in this database project compelling.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank
|
PARTICIPANTS IN THE CANOPY DATABASE
WORKSHOP |
|||
|
September 19. 2003 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judy |
Cushing |
|
judyc@evergreen.edu |
|
Mike |
Figgens |
SEV |
friggenj@sevilleta.edu |
|
Mike |
Finch |
|
fickerm@evergreen.edu |
|
Julian |
Hadley |
|
jhadley@fas.harvard.edu |
|
Clair |
Hoff |
U of |
choff@cisunix.unh.edu |
|
Nicole |
Kaplan |
Shortgrasse Steppe |
nicole.kaplan@colostate.edu |
|
First Name |
Last Name |
Site/Institution |
email contact |
|
Nalini |
Nadkarni |
|
nadkarnn@evergreen.edu |
|
Julius |
Oszlanyi |
|
juliu.oszlanyi@savba.sk |
|
Tim |
Schowalter |
|
tschowalter@adcenter.lsu.edu |
|
Paul |
Schwarz |
|
paul.schwarz@oregonstate.edu |
|
Jason |
|
|
jasonwalker@asu.edu |
|
Wu |
Wu |
LUQ |
wwu01@syr.edu |