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
As we begin adding in additional plankton functional types, we need to decide on an appropriate naming convention for these PFTs.
For example, do we use autotroph vs heterotroph? Or phytoplankton vs zooplankton? Right now it is autotroph and zoo, which seems inconsistent.
Additionally, since our phytoplankton groups are sp, diat, and diaz, it would make sense to name zooplankton groups by some sort of name that represents their size/function, e.g. microzoo, mesozoo or macrozoo rather than zoo1, zoo2, and zoo3.
Alternatively, we can decide that zooplankton should have a different naming convention than phytoplankton.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As we begin adding in additional plankton functional types, we need to decide on an appropriate naming convention for these PFTs.
For example, do we use
autotroph
vsheterotroph
? Orphytoplankton
vszooplankton
? Right now it isautotroph
andzoo
, which seems inconsistent.Additionally, since our phytoplankton groups are
sp
,diat
, anddiaz
, it would make sense to name zooplankton groups by some sort of name that represents their size/function, e.g.microzoo
,mesozoo
ormacrozoo
rather thanzoo1
,zoo2
, andzoo3
.Alternatively, we can decide that zooplankton should have a different naming convention than phytoplankton.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: