Species:
-Name
-Description
-Behavior
-Reproduction, seasonality, competiton, natural history etc...
-Habitat
The name should be a form field search due to the many number of species which will be in the data base. The behavior Should be searchable under each subheading, i.e. reproduction. The habitat is the link between the species entity, and the location and the observation entities.
Location:
-Habitat
-Geographic
-Observed
The most important part of location is the habitat. This should be divided into two diofferent sections. The first geographic would be all the areas where the species could exist, where the conditions would favor its survival. The observed would be the realized or characteristic habitat. I guess I would see this as a possible versus realized niche idea. This would also serve as the link between the observation and species entities. It should be searchable by habitat type, i.e. wetlands, forrests etc.... It should also be searchable by habitat, i.e. what species live in the wetlands of hog island.
Observation:
-Species Observed
-Time observed
-Location and habitat observed in
-who observed
-Quality?
This is the crux of the data base. This is the actual data. This will provide us with the species and locations and habitats to be used in the other two. This should be searchable by species by form field, due again to the number of species that will be involved. The time could also be done using form field, since data will range from exact time and date, to a season. The location should probably be structured again using the box method in order to refine the searches a little.
I forgot natural history. That should be included under behavior in the species entity, and we would probably want that to be a form field search because of the wide range of data that could be covered by a subject like "natural history".
Entity= Family, Genus species
- common name
- physical description
- reproduction
- feeding
- characteristic habitat
I think that all of the above should be in free text form, except for name and common name.
Entity= Location/ Observation
- where observed
- who observed
- when observed
- quality of observation
In the "where observed" catagory, the listing should be the actual location on the eastern shore (x,y) then below the location there could perhaps be the option to go to a more detailed description of that location (thus habitat). Also, I forgot to put in at the top, under description "competition" and "seasoality" and under the first Entity I forgot to put as a category "author/date of establishment" (which I often encounteredin my research of decapod crustaceans, but a thing that perhaps everyone else didn't encounter).
I think that the "description" and the"characteristic habitat" parts of this should be in free text and that all of therest should be structured. Conservation status could be placed under the first entity as well.
SPECIES
Names
taxanomic and common
Physical Description
all basic morphological charachteristics
reproduction
life span
Behavior
competition
predators/prey
feeding
reproduction
Typical habitat
The above attributes for SPECIES should be in structured text form unless otherwise noted.
LOCATION
Northampton County
Accomack County
specific habitat and species found in each county
Dates of references containing last recordings of observations
OBSERVATION (I don't really see that much of a difference between this entity and it's attributes when compared to the previous ones!)
-But here's a shot anyway
Actual observed habitats compared to "normal"
Actual observed behavior compared to "normal"
Any sign of a new or alternate species
Quality of records, references, and sources used
**All of the above should be in structured text form, some information that could be in free text form that I think could especially apply to my mammal group are:
Economic Importance
Game or Non-game species
Furs
Food
Sport
Tracks
Interaction with humans
Limited Past accounts of mammals (haven't found much info. on)
This is just some broad information which I hope will be useful to the group and the final data model. I'm sure this can be rearranged or restructured in a more complete way.
SPECIES
Taxonomic and common names
Physical description (and life span)
Behavior
reproduction
biotic interactions (predator/prey/competition)
Habitat
LOCATION
Geographic location (range/distribution)
Habitat/Niche
OBSERVATION
Species observed
Where observed (location/habitat)
When observed (time, ie. season, day/night)
Who observed
quality of observation
I am still uncertain about what should be in free-text or structured text. I do believe that behavior will need free-text room. Habitat and description may need free-text (at least at times).
SPECIES
-GENUS
-SPECIES NAME
-COMMON NAME
-GENERAL GROUPING (IF APPLICABLE)
-PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
LOCATION
-GEOGRAPHIC (DISTRIBUTION) OR THE "BOX" LOCATION
-TYPE OF HABITAT (NESTING)
-SEASONAL ABUNDANCE (TIME)
OBSERVATION
-SEASON (TIME)
-WHO
-WHERE
This is an attempt at a composite model that incorporates the attributes proposed above:
Taxonomic
Order
Family
Genus
Species
Authority
Common Name
Biological
Physical Description
Image(s) of Species
Behavior
Reproduction
Natural History
Typical Habitat(s)
Biotic Interactions (competition etc.)
Trophic Relationships (Feeding, predators)
Economic/Human Interactions
Species Observed
Citation for Observation
Observer
Date
Location(s)
Habitat(s)
Abundance
Related Museum Specimens
Latitude - upper left of bounding box
Longitude - upper left of bounding box
Latitude - lower right of bounding box
Longitude - lower right of bounding box
Name of Location
Brief Description of Location
Habitat(s)
Map URL(s)