selfIncompatibilityType
zedomel opened this issue · comments
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| GUID | |
| Rebipp Class | rebipp:PlantTrait |
| Label | selfIncompatibilityType |
| Definition | The type or class of the self-incompatibility system of the plant species. |
| Comments | If a self-incompatibility system is absent this term should be filled according (absent). Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary. |
| Examples | gametophytic, sporophytic, absent,unknown |
| Controlled vocabulary | |
| Darwin Core Class | Occurrence |
| Cardinality | One to one |
| Reference Protocol |
Why not making it more simple: self-compatible or self-incompatible (two categories of controlled vocabulary)
The same question of #57.
@fonturbel the controlled vocabulary is a recommendation. So, people are free to adopt any vocabulary of terms that they like. We can define a controlled vocab and recommend it adoption, this vocab can have more specific terms like gametophytic and also more general terms like self-compatible, then people can choose each term to use.
So my suggestion of the controlled vocab is based on Cardoso et al. 2018:
gametophyticsporophytic homomorphicsporophytic heteromorphicsporophyticlate-actingself-compatibleself-incompatibleabsentunknown
This vocab covers most of the use cases?
Cardoso et al. 2018 is a good and very complete reference. Some researchers may have more detailed information, so a more complete list could be useful. But, not sure what "absent" would mean (absence of self-incompatibility would be self-compatibility).
Agree with @pietrokiyoshi! There is no "absent" selfIncompatibility system.
@pietrokiyoshi and @viniciusduartina I think that absent was proposed as a replacement for empty (when the person do not fill that field). But I agree, we can just let the field empty!
If the person do not fill the field, can it be considered as "unknow"? Or "unknow" is only to species with no record on the self-incompatibility?
@joiceiamara I don't see any difference between filling it with unknown and let it empty. For me the term unknown can be removed from the controlled vocab.
Nothing to add beyond the already mentioned.
Nothing to add
Nothing to add as well!
I agree with @zedomel to let it more simple if we choose to use a controlled vocabulary. Nothing else to add.
Not changed