[APGG] GIS attributes or BG-Base
60 views
Skip to first unread message
Brett
Apr 28, 2010, 2:58:49 PM4/28/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
system for. So my questions are:
1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
into their components, i.e. genus, species, rank, infraspecific
epithet, cultivar, etc. Depending on your collections it can get
hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
genus. What are your experiences?
2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
is best. E.g. accession number/qualifier, family, species, location/
bed. What are you experiences?
3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
to select? E.g. create a list of all the accession numbers of species
from some country and then feed that into ArcMap to select those
plants in the GIS system.
This post is getting a little long so I'll leave it at that for now.
I would like to know what your experiences are how different people
are coordinating their GIS systems with BG-Base (or other collection
management software).
Thanks,
Brett
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS" group.
To post to this group, send email to ap...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to apgg+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/apgg?hl=en.
and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
system for. So my questions are:
1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
into their components, i.e. genus, species, rank, infraspecific
epithet, cultivar, etc. Depending on your collections it can get
hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
genus. What are your experiences?
2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
is best. E.g. accession number/qualifier, family, species, location/
bed. What are you experiences?
3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
to select? E.g. create a list of all the accession numbers of species
from some country and then feed that into ArcMap to select those
plants in the GIS system.
This post is getting a little long so I'll leave it at that for now.
I would like to know what your experiences are how different people
are coordinating their GIS systems with BG-Base (or other collection
management software).
Thanks,
Brett
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS" group.
To post to this group, send email to ap...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to apgg+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/apgg?hl=en.
Becky Sucher
Apr 28, 2010, 4:47:28 PM4/28/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Brett,
We use Microsoft Access for our plant records database, so our
situation is a little different, but hopefully the concepts are
similar. The only information we track in the GIS plant feature class
is the accession number, as well as the map bed, map sublocation, and
map coordinate (the last three of which are derived from the polygon
in which the plant/point is located). Our accession numbers include a
“dash number” for each specimen of an accession, so in your case/in BG-
BASE, it would translate to one feature for every specimen record (I
think).
My experience has been that the less information you duplicate between
the two systems, the better. The more you duplicate, the more issues
with synchronization you will have. And there really is no reason to
keep track of the same information twice, as long as you can link the
two systems. Luckily, with Microsoft Access, we can create a live
link between our GIS and our Plant Records Access database by creating
a database connection in ArcCatalog via the “Add OLE DB Connection”.
In Access, we create a query containing the accession number and any
other information we may need for our map. Most times, this query
just includes the accession number, taxon, common name, growth habit,
canopy size, etc., but can be modified to include anything we need or
want. In ArcMap, we can add the query from Access to the map (add
data button) and then create a join (right click your plant layer in
the TOC, choose Joins and Relates, then Join…) between the plant
feature class and the query from Access using the common field,
accession number. I imagine you could do something similar in BG-BASE
by exporting a query from BG-BASE, adding that table to your map, then
creating a join to that table. It wouldn’t be “live” data, but it
would work, as long as you had a common field on which the join would
be based (like accession number).
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions!
Becky Sucher
Coordinator of Plant Records/Applications
Missouri Botanical Garden
rebecca...@mobot.org
We use Microsoft Access for our plant records database, so our
situation is a little different, but hopefully the concepts are
similar. The only information we track in the GIS plant feature class
is the accession number, as well as the map bed, map sublocation, and
map coordinate (the last three of which are derived from the polygon
in which the plant/point is located). Our accession numbers include a
“dash number” for each specimen of an accession, so in your case/in BG-
BASE, it would translate to one feature for every specimen record (I
think).
My experience has been that the less information you duplicate between
the two systems, the better. The more you duplicate, the more issues
with synchronization you will have. And there really is no reason to
keep track of the same information twice, as long as you can link the
two systems. Luckily, with Microsoft Access, we can create a live
link between our GIS and our Plant Records Access database by creating
a database connection in ArcCatalog via the “Add OLE DB Connection”.
In Access, we create a query containing the accession number and any
other information we may need for our map. Most times, this query
just includes the accession number, taxon, common name, growth habit,
canopy size, etc., but can be modified to include anything we need or
want. In ArcMap, we can add the query from Access to the map (add
data button) and then create a join (right click your plant layer in
the TOC, choose Joins and Relates, then Join…) between the plant
feature class and the query from Access using the common field,
accession number. I imagine you could do something similar in BG-BASE
by exporting a query from BG-BASE, adding that table to your map, then
creating a join to that table. It wouldn’t be “live” data, but it
would work, as long as you had a common field on which the join would
be based (like accession number).
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions!
Becky Sucher
Coordinator of Plant Records/Applications
Missouri Botanical Garden
rebecca...@mobot.org
Ericka Witcher
Apr 29, 2010, 11:28:45 AM4/29/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Hi Brett,
I know we've discussed this before, but for the sake of getting a
public pool of information assembled:
We, too, limit the number of fields and thus the amount of redundancy
between bg-base and our ArcMap plants table. In the ArcMap plants
table I have a field for accession# with qualifier; one field for the
genus with species only; a field for 'status'- ie alive, dead,
removed, relocated; a field for bed or area; a field for quadrant
number; a field for the 'type'- cycad, palm, conifer, other; and a few
other fields relevant to using our GPS unit. This way I'm storing only
the information pertaining directly to the map along with our most
common search criteria - by accession, genus, species, or one
individual plant. Due to our specialization, however, our most common
display criteria is the 'type', which is probably not as important at
other gardens. Anything else, including family or ssp or health status
or provenance or project code, etc, can be queried out of bg-base and
joined to the ArcMap table temporarily, which segues neatly into...
We're able to select/display plants in ArcGIS based on bg-base queries
exactly the way Becky Sucher described. We s/list a set of info (eg.
cycads that have reached maturation and are 'male' or 'female'), and
when we export the report we list the info by accession number with
qualifier, which is also a field in Arc. Our reports get exported to a
text file, which I open in xcel, convert to comma-delimited columns,
and save as a dbf IV. I add the table to the map and create a join
with the plants table based on the accession# w/qual. The join is
easily removed. This way I can select plants for display based on
whatever search criteria (eg. all Zamia amblyphyllidia that are male)
without having to store that info permanently in the arcmap plants
table and perpetually update it (eg. I can re-select from bg-base each
month after the cycads are checked for maturation and join the new
table, rather than entering the additional sex info into the arcmap
table). The trick, really, is getting good at the notoriously
persnickety s/list queries in bg-base. I know this is my limiting
factor. If you need to know about creating reports from your s/list
and exporting, call me Monday and Arantza (our database gal) and I
will go through it with you. We can probably email a template if need
be. But basically, if you can get your info into an xcel table with a
field in common with your arcmap table, you can project that info
spatially.
I'd be interested in hearing from other gardens who use BG-Base. What
fields do you maintain in Arc? how do you display your other database
information, if at all? am I doing this in the most straightforward
manner possible? The way I'm doing it now seems to keep the potential
for human error and time-consuming data-entry to a relative minimum,
but how can I be sure without seeing other methods, right?
As an aside, Mike O'Neal, et al, claim to be actively working on
providing direct links between BG-Base and Arc so that this
query/display divide won't be such an issue for us. They've been
saying this for awhile, however.
Cheers, everyone, and happy mapping,
Ericka Witcher
Collections Supervisor
Montgomery Botanical Center
305-667-3800 x.113
eri...@montgomerybotanical.org
www.montgomerybotanical.org
I know we've discussed this before, but for the sake of getting a
public pool of information assembled:
We, too, limit the number of fields and thus the amount of redundancy
between bg-base and our ArcMap plants table. In the ArcMap plants
table I have a field for accession# with qualifier; one field for the
genus with species only; a field for 'status'- ie alive, dead,
removed, relocated; a field for bed or area; a field for quadrant
number; a field for the 'type'- cycad, palm, conifer, other; and a few
other fields relevant to using our GPS unit. This way I'm storing only
the information pertaining directly to the map along with our most
common search criteria - by accession, genus, species, or one
individual plant. Due to our specialization, however, our most common
display criteria is the 'type', which is probably not as important at
other gardens. Anything else, including family or ssp or health status
or provenance or project code, etc, can be queried out of bg-base and
joined to the ArcMap table temporarily, which segues neatly into...
We're able to select/display plants in ArcGIS based on bg-base queries
exactly the way Becky Sucher described. We s/list a set of info (eg.
cycads that have reached maturation and are 'male' or 'female'), and
when we export the report we list the info by accession number with
qualifier, which is also a field in Arc. Our reports get exported to a
text file, which I open in xcel, convert to comma-delimited columns,
and save as a dbf IV. I add the table to the map and create a join
with the plants table based on the accession# w/qual. The join is
easily removed. This way I can select plants for display based on
whatever search criteria (eg. all Zamia amblyphyllidia that are male)
without having to store that info permanently in the arcmap plants
table and perpetually update it (eg. I can re-select from bg-base each
month after the cycads are checked for maturation and join the new
table, rather than entering the additional sex info into the arcmap
table). The trick, really, is getting good at the notoriously
persnickety s/list queries in bg-base. I know this is my limiting
factor. If you need to know about creating reports from your s/list
and exporting, call me Monday and Arantza (our database gal) and I
will go through it with you. We can probably email a template if need
be. But basically, if you can get your info into an xcel table with a
field in common with your arcmap table, you can project that info
spatially.
I'd be interested in hearing from other gardens who use BG-Base. What
fields do you maintain in Arc? how do you display your other database
information, if at all? am I doing this in the most straightforward
manner possible? The way I'm doing it now seems to keep the potential
for human error and time-consuming data-entry to a relative minimum,
but how can I be sure without seeing other methods, right?
As an aside, Mike O'Neal, et al, claim to be actively working on
providing direct links between BG-Base and Arc so that this
query/display divide won't be such an issue for us. They've been
saying this for awhile, however.
Cheers, everyone, and happy mapping,
Ericka Witcher
Collections Supervisor
Montgomery Botanical Center
305-667-3800 x.113
eri...@montgomerybotanical.org
www.montgomerybotanical.org
mike_oneal
Apr 29, 2010, 3:43:13 PM4/29/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Hi Brett -
I would echo Becky's sentiments in that we would suggest you store
just the accession number and qualifier (similar to the 'dash' number
that Missouri uses) as well as perhaps a corresponding bed location
and of course the specific data point(s) for each plant or groups of
plants. As Becky points out, once you start duplicating information
between two systems you will constantly be faced with synchronization
and data integrity issues.
OpenInsight (the database we use for BG-BASE) does not contain a
direct a live data link to ArcGIS. After meeting with the tech
folks at ESRI we have opted to use SQL Express as the connection tool
to facilitate this live link. ArcGIS can connect natively to SQL
Express and better yet it is a free download. Behind-the-scenes we
have created a set of mirrored tables in SQL Express that are
immediately updated with every change that is made in BG-BASE,
thereby making the changes immediately available to ArcGIS as
well. Any query you would normally be able to run at that point in
BG-BASE would (should) also be available on the mapping side as well.
>Does anyone have a way they can export saved lists from BG-base (of
>say accession numbers from a query) which can then be fed into
>ArcMap as a list of features to select? E.g. create a list of all
>the accession numbers of species from some country and then feed
>that into ArcMap to select those
>plants in the GIS system.
Change the output to a text file (such as tab or csv), at which
point the data should be able to be incorporated into ArcMAP.
I would be happy to discuss this with you further, just drop me a
line or give me a call, I will be back in the office mid next week.
Best regards,
Mike O'Neal
I would echo Becky's sentiments in that we would suggest you store
just the accession number and qualifier (similar to the 'dash' number
that Missouri uses) as well as perhaps a corresponding bed location
and of course the specific data point(s) for each plant or groups of
plants. As Becky points out, once you start duplicating information
between two systems you will constantly be faced with synchronization
and data integrity issues.
OpenInsight (the database we use for BG-BASE) does not contain a
direct a live data link to ArcGIS. After meeting with the tech
folks at ESRI we have opted to use SQL Express as the connection tool
to facilitate this live link. ArcGIS can connect natively to SQL
Express and better yet it is a free download. Behind-the-scenes we
have created a set of mirrored tables in SQL Express that are
immediately updated with every change that is made in BG-BASE,
thereby making the changes immediately available to ArcGIS as
well. Any query you would normally be able to run at that point in
BG-BASE would (should) also be available on the mapping side as well.
>Does anyone have a way they can export saved lists from BG-base (of
>say accession numbers from a query) which can then be fed into
>ArcMap as a list of features to select? E.g. create a list of all
>the accession numbers of species from some country and then feed
>that into ArcMap to select those
>plants in the GIS system.
point the data should be able to be incorporated into ArcMAP.
I would be happy to discuss this with you further, just drop me a
line or give me a call, I will be back in the office mid next week.
Best regards,
Mike O'Neal
Brett
Apr 29, 2010, 3:58:45 PM4/29/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Becky/Ericka,
Thanks for the responses. It's always good to here about how the
other half live. I'm relatively new to the GIS world and I sometimes
forget that my geodatabase is actually a database and I can do things
like joins so thats a big help.
Hopefully we'll get some other people chiming in with their
experiences.
- Brett
Brian Morgan
Apr 29, 2010, 5:57:12 PM4/29/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Brett,
We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
at http://www.apgg.org/datamodel/downloads , and I can provide you
with the BG-BASE script too if you need it. I hope this helps.
Brian Morgan
We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
at http://www.apgg.org/datamodel/downloads , and I can provide you
with the BG-BASE script too if you need it. I hope this helps.
Brian Morgan
ericka...@gmail.com
Apr 29, 2010, 11:12:06 PM4/29/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Sorry folks, my email's been a little wonky lately. I'm not sure why it re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike, I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS table, when you get a chance...
thanks,
eri...@montgomerybotanical.org
www.montgomerybotanical.org
On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <ericka...@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks,
eri...@montgomerybotanical.org
www.montgomerybotanical.org
On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <ericka...@gmail.com> wrote:
Brett
Apr 30, 2010, 8:27:41 AM4/30/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
From what I've seen Grevid/Garden Notepad just store their information
in CSV files so if you can export your GIS data into a format that
Grevid can understand and put the file in the right place it should be
able to insert it directly into BG-Base.
Just a thought,
Brett
On Apr 29, 11:12 pm, erickawitc...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry folks, my email's been a little wonky lately. I'm not sure why it
> re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike,
> I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS
> table, when you get a chance...
>
> thanks,
> Ericka Witcher
> Collections Supervisor
> Montgomery Botanical Center
> 305-667-3800 x.113
> eric...@montgomerybotanical.orgwww.montgomerybotanical.org
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <erickawitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
in CSV files so if you can export your GIS data into a format that
Grevid can understand and put the file in the right place it should be
able to insert it directly into BG-Base.
Just a thought,
Brett
On Apr 29, 11:12 pm, erickawitc...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry folks, my email's been a little wonky lately. I'm not sure why it
> re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike,
> I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS
> table, when you get a chance...
>
> thanks,
> Ericka Witcher
> Collections Supervisor
> Montgomery Botanical Center
> 305-667-3800 x.113
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <erickawitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Brian Morgan bjmor...@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> > > Brett,
>
> > > We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
> > > have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
> > > part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
> > > make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
> > > accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
> > > duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
> > > for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
> > > that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
> > > go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
> > > perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
> > > written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
> > > table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
> > > and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
> > > soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
> > > done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
> > > athttp://www.apgg.org/datamodel/downloads, and I can provide you
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Brian Morgan bjmor...@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> > > Brett,
>
> > > We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
> > > have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
> > > part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
> > > make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
> > > accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
> > > duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
> > > for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
> > > that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
> > > go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
> > > perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
> > > written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
> > > table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
> > > and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
> > > soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
> > > done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
> > > with the BG-BASE script too if you need it. I hope this helps.
>
> > > Brian Morgan
>
> > > On Apr 28, 11:58 am, Brett brettat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
> > >> and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
> > >> sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
> > >> managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
> > >> to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
> > >> to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
> > >> ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
>
> > >> To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
> > >> better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
> > >> system for. So my questions are:
>
> > >> 1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
> > >> attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
> > >> into their components, ie genus, species, rank, infraspecific
>
> > > Brian Morgan
>
> > > On Apr 28, 11:58 am, Brett brettat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
> > >> and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
> > >> sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
> > >> managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
> > >> to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
> > >> to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
> > >> ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
>
> > >> To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
> > >> better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
> > >> system for. So my questions are:
>
> > >> 1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
> > >> attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
> > >> epithet, cultivar, etc. Depending on your collections it can get
> > >> hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
> > >> cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
> > >> script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
> > >> word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
> > >> genus. What are your experiences?
>
> > >> 2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
> > >> different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
> > >> is best. Eg accession number/qualifier, family, species, location/
> > >> hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
> > >> cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
> > >> script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
> > >> word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
> > >> genus. What are your experiences?
>
> > >> 2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
> > >> different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
> > >> bed. What are you experiences?
>
> > >> 3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
> > >> in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
> > >> diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
> > >> be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
> > >> the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
> > >> they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
> > >> from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
> > >> to select? Eg create a list of all the accession numbers of species
>
> > >> 3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
> > >> in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
> > >> diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
> > >> be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
> > >> the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
> > >> they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
> > >> from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
Brett
Apr 30, 2010, 8:40:03 AM4/30/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
From what I've seen Grevid/Garden Notepad uses a CSV file for
importing the records that were updated in the field. If you could
export the data from the GIS into the same format and put the file in
the right place Grevid could probably import it for you.
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <erickawitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
importing the records that were updated in the field. If you could
export the data from the GIS into the same format and put the file in
the right place Grevid could probably import it for you.
> Sorry folks, my email's been a little wonky lately. I'm not sure why it
> re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike,
> I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS
> table, when you get a chance...
>
> thanks,
> Ericka Witcher
> Collections Supervisor
> Montgomery Botanical Center
> 305-667-3800 x.113
> eric...@montgomerybotanical.orgwww.montgomerybotanical.org
> re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike,
> I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS
> table, when you get a chance...
>
> thanks,
> Ericka Witcher
> Collections Supervisor
> Montgomery Botanical Center
> 305-667-3800 x.113
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <erickawitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Brian Morgan bjmor...@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> > > Brett,
>
> > > We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
> > > have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
> > > part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
> > > make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
> > > accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
> > > duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
> > > for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
> > > that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
> > > go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
> > > perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
> > > written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
> > > table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
> > > and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
> > > soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
> > > done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
> > > athttp://www.apgg.org/datamodel/downloads, and I can provide you
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Brian Morgan bjmor...@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> > > Brett,
>
> > > We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
> > > have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
> > > part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
> > > make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
> > > accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
> > > duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
> > > for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
> > > that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
> > > go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
> > > perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
> > > written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
> > > table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
> > > and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
> > > soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
> > > done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
> > > with the BG-BASE script too if you need it. I hope this helps.
>
> > > Brian Morgan
>
> > > On Apr 28, 11:58 am, Brett brettat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
> > >> and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
> > >> sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
> > >> managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
> > >> to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
> > >> to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
> > >> ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
>
> > >> To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
> > >> better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
> > >> system for. So my questions are:
>
> > >> 1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
> > >> attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
> > >> into their components, ie genus, species, rank, infraspecific
>
> > > Brian Morgan
>
> > > On Apr 28, 11:58 am, Brett brettat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
> > >> and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
> > >> sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
> > >> managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
> > >> to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
> > >> to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
> > >> ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
>
> > >> To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
> > >> better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
> > >> system for. So my questions are:
>
> > >> 1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
> > >> attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
> > >> epithet, cultivar, etc. Depending on your collections it can get
> > >> hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
> > >> cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
> > >> script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
> > >> word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
> > >> genus. What are your experiences?
>
> > >> 2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
> > >> different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
> > >> is best. Eg accession number/qualifier, family, species, location/
> > >> hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
> > >> cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
> > >> script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
> > >> word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
> > >> genus. What are your experiences?
>
> > >> 2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
> > >> different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
> > >> bed. What are you experiences?
>
> > >> 3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
> > >> in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
> > >> diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
> > >> be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
> > >> the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
> > >> they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
> > >> from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
> > >> to select? Eg create a list of all the accession numbers of species
>
> > >> 3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
> > >> in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
> > >> diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
> > >> be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
> > >> the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
> > >> they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
> > >> from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
mike_oneal
May 5, 2010, 1:33:22 PM5/5/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Hi Erica -
Brian, correct me if I am wrong on this... but as I recall we wrote
the script specifically for UC Davis to facilitate automatic creation
of new records in PLANTS based on data that had been collected in the
field. Pretty quick-and-dirty, not a lot of error checking, and it
does not update existing PLANTS records. Is that correct?
Mike
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <erickawitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian, correct me if I am wrong on this... but as I recall we wrote
the script specifically for UC Davis to facilitate automatic creation
of new records in PLANTS based on data that had been collected in the
field. Pretty quick-and-dirty, not a lot of error checking, and it
does not update existing PLANTS records. Is that correct?
Mike
> Sorry folks, my email's been a little wonky lately. I'm not sure why it
> re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike,
> I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS
> table, when you get a chance...
>
> thanks,
> Ericka Witcher
> Collections Supervisor
> Montgomery Botanical Center
> 305-667-3800 x.113
> eric...@montgomerybotanical.orgwww.montgomerybotanical.org
> re-sent Brian's email from my address. But since I'm here, Brian or Mike,
> I'd love to see that script for uploading info from the GIS into the PLANTS
> table, when you get a chance...
>
> thanks,
> Ericka Witcher
> Collections Supervisor
> Montgomery Botanical Center
> 305-667-3800 x.113
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 10:47pm, Ericka Witcher <erickawitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Brian Morgan bjmor...@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> > > Brett,
>
> > > We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
> > > have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
> > > part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
> > > make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
> > > accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
> > > duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
> > > for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
> > > that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
> > > go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
> > > perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
> > > written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
> > > table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
> > > and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
> > > soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
> > > done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
> > > athttp://www.apgg.org/datamodel/downloads, and I can provide you
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Brian Morgan bjmor...@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> > > Brett,
>
> > > We have been trying to answer these questions for quite some time, and
> > > have settled on an approach that has worked pretty well for the most
> > > part. Our approach is to keep all of the information that you need to
> > > make your collection maps in the GIS, and other information regarding
> > > accessions, provenance, etc. in BG-BASE. This means that we have some
> > > duplicated information in both systems, but we also have a strategy
> > > for dealing with it. Since we map all of our plants in the GIS we use
> > > that information to populate our PLANTS table in BG-BASE. So, if we
> > > go through a particular garden and add and\or remove plants, we
> > > perfect the information in the GIS first, and then use a script
> > > written by Mike O'Neal to upload that information into the PLANTS
> > > table. Some new functionality being developed by the Arnold Arboretum
> > > and BG-BASE should allow for the two systems to be linked together
> > > soon, but until it is released, our current approach gets the job
> > > done. The ArcGIS geodatabase schema we use is available for download
> > > with the BG-BASE script too if you need it. I hope this helps.
>
> > > Brian Morgan
>
> > > On Apr 28, 11:58 am, Brett brettat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
> > >> and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
> > >> sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
> > >> managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
> > >> to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
> > >> to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
> > >> ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
>
> > >> To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
> > >> better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
> > >> system for. So my questions are:
>
> > >> 1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
> > >> attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
> > >> into their components, ie genus, species, rank, infraspecific
>
> > > Brian Morgan
>
> > > On Apr 28, 11:58 am, Brett brettat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'm looking at the separation of information between our GIS system
> > >> and BG-Base. The GIS is a very generic database that supports all
> > >> sorts of diverse use cases whereas BG-Base is very specific for
> > >> managing plant collections. In order to avoid duplication of data and
> > >> to minimize the amount of work to keep the two synchronized I'm trying
> > >> to figure out what are the most necessary attributes to store in
> > >> ArcMap and what should be left in BG-Base.
>
> > >> To me it seems like the less information you can store in ArcMap the
> > >> better. If course this will depend on what you are using your GIS
> > >> system for. So my questions are:
>
> > >> 1. I'm trying to decide if it's better to just have a "Species name"
> > >> attribute in ArcMap or to separate the different parts of the name
> > >> epithet, cultivar, etc. Depending on your collections it can get
> > >> hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
> > >> cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
> > >> script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
> > >> word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
> > >> genus. What are your experiences?
>
> > >> 2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
> > >> different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
> > >> is best. Eg accession number/qualifier, family, species, location/
> > >> hairy fast with multiplate infraspecific parts and hybrids between
> > >> cultivars, etc. Also creating good labels on the map would require a
> > >> script to "build" the name. The benefit of a componentized(is that a
> > >> word?) name is that you can search for specific features/plants by say
> > >> genus. What are your experiences?
>
> > >> 2. What attributes are most common for individual plants between
> > >> different garden GIS systems? To me it seems like the minimal amount
> > >> bed. What are you experiences?
>
> > >> 3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
> > >> in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
> > >> diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
> > >> be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
> > >> the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
> > >> they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
> > >> from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
> > >> to select? Eg create a list of all the accession numbers of species
>
> > >> 3. The one limiting factor with minimizing which attributes are stored
> > >> in the GIS system vs. BG-Base is that it can get complicated selecting
> > >> diverse sets of plants in the GIS system and there's always going to
> > >> be something you want to select that doesn't have the attributes in
> > >> the GIS but does have the fields in BG-Base. Does anyone have a way
> > >> they can export saved lists from BG-base (of say accession numbers
> > >> from a query) which can then be fed into ArcMap as a list of features
Brian Morgan
May 6, 2010, 1:12:01 PM5/6/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Mike,
That's right. The script basically just loads records from our GIS
into the PLANTS table. We perform an update on a collection by
deleting PLANTS table records first and then loading new data via the
script. Quick and dirty.
Brian
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/apgg?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's right. The script basically just loads records from our GIS
into the PLANTS table. We perform an update on a collection by
deleting PLANTS table records first and then loading new data via the
script. Quick and dirty.
Brian
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ericka Witcher
May 6, 2010, 6:36:09 PM5/6/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
So do you all not maintain "check notes", or are those also recorded
and then updated within the GIS? As I understand it, if we were to
delete a record from the PLANTS, then update with a new one, we would
lose the data from that check notes field.
Ericka
and then updated within the GIS? As I understand it, if we were to
delete a record from the PLANTS, then update with a new one, we would
lose the data from that check notes field.
Ericka
Brian Morgan
May 7, 2010, 1:52:29 PM5/7/10
to The Alliance for Public Gardens GIS
Ericka,
We don't have check notes, and you would lose that data with this
method.
Brian
> >> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/apgg?hl=en.-Hide quoted text -
We don't have check notes, and you would lose that data with this
method.
Brian
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages