Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

missing 2 unique codeStem ids #31

Open
marissalee opened this issue Aug 8, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

missing 2 unique codeStem ids #31

marissalee opened this issue Aug 8, 2018 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@marissalee
Copy link
Collaborator

See lines 118-132 in the readme.Rmd...

There are 2 unique codeStem ids that are found in the trait data (xrf sample names) and the sequence data, but not in the stemSamples data (deployment sample names). These codeStem ids are not found in the percent mass loss data. Because the main goal is to analyze decay responses, I'm going to continue to leave these codeStems out of the stemSamples dataframe. Is it possible that stem id numbers got switched? Something to follow-up on.

@jeffpowell2
Copy link
Collaborator

The two problematic codeStems in seqSamples and traits.stem are 'acpa2' and 'lepa4'.

I suspect that 'lepa4' should be 'lepa1' but I can't confirm this from Jess' notes. @marissalee or @wcornwell , whichever one of you currently has the shavings from the T0 small samples (I'm pretty sure that I handed these over with the large ones), could you check the writing on the bags? If you find 'lepa1', Jess made a mistake reading it but it should be fine to just change the label. If you find 'lepa4', then either Brad made a mistake writing on the bag (possibly) or we harvested a fourth stem and cut it up but only analysed the shavings and didn't use the cut up pieces (unlikely, but see below).

'acpa2' looks like an extra sample that was analysed for fungi and chemistry since we have four 'acpa' samples in those data. Three of the 'acpa' stems (1, 3, 4) have massloss data - I have no idea why we have shavings but didn't use the cut up pieces for anything else. In any case, I suggest just leave 'acpa2' out.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants