You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This dataset was ingested using three sources: 1. a supplemental data release, which contained dry-bulk-density, total 210-Pb and lat-longs, 2. A digitization of a figure with loss-on-ignition, and 3. a table in a the paper with site_id's and elevations. This is ok for now, but ideally I would like to make two improvements in the long run.
We should contact the authors and see if we can get them to publish the original loss-on-ignition values, so we are not relying on the digitized figure anymore.
In the supplemental information I removed dry-bulk-density and total 210-Pb associated with 'Tusk', because in the supplemental data release, there was an obvious copy-and-paste error with erroneous 210-Pb and dry-bulk-density values. I wasn't able to fix the copy-paste error, so I just omitted them.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This dataset was ingested using three sources: 1. a supplemental data release, which contained dry-bulk-density, total 210-Pb and lat-longs, 2. A digitization of a figure with loss-on-ignition, and 3. a table in a the paper with site_id's and elevations. This is ok for now, but ideally I would like to make two improvements in the long run.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: