Economic Botany

Economic Botany

Mark Jackson (M.Jackson@kew.org)

Giardino d’Inverno 16:00-17:30 TDWG 2013 Florence

Agenda

• Description• Issues• Where Next?

History

F.E.M. Cook (1995) Economic Botany Data Collection Standard

• Status: TDWG Prior Standard

• Category: Best Current practice

• Permanent URL: http://www.tdwg.org/standards/103/

• Core content available: http://www.kew.org/tdwguses/

Purpose

• A set of standard terms for describing plant uses• Applicable to taxa and specimens• Comprehensive and unambiguous• To make it easy to record information about

uses• To make it easy to find information on uses• To promote collaboration through information

exchange and comparison of datasets

What is the Uses Standard?

• A collection of vocabularies or sets of words, that are used singly or, more often, in combination to describe uses of plants.

• Like terms are grouped.• Each group has broad and narrow terms.• Acceptable combinations of terms are defined

as part of the standard.

Structure and Content

Structure

• Hierarchy– Level 1 terms– Level 2 terms– Multiple sets of level 3 terms

• Each set of level 3 terms may have a hierarchy• Level 3 subjects depend on level 2 term

Issues

• Presentation unduly complex. – Simplification necessary to encourage other users e.g.

taxonomists.• Implementation can be confusing to users.– E.g. Plant Parts appear at different levels in the current

system (depending on which Level 1).• Certain use groups present cross-cultural difficulties. • User requirements differ, and local versions have

tended to develop based on local needs.

Other issues

• Book only – no digital format!• No guidance re combining terms– e.g. Food, Leaves, young leaves + Food, Leaves,

ceremonial food• Overlap in level 3 sets

What next?

Proposed Simplifications 2013• Merge closely related Level 1 terms.

– Food to join with Food additives.– Bee plants to join with Invertebrate food.– Vertebrate poisons to join with non-vertebrate poisons.

• Level 1 stabilised.• Rationalise descriptors.

– i.e. don't vary descriptor terms according to use group.– Plant part, Organism, Chemical lists consistent throughout.

• Allow flexibility of choice of Level 3 descriptors. – Choice available from a set of defined descriptors according to

local need.

Additional proposed changes 2013

• Move Antifertility agents from SOCIAL USES to MEDICINES.

• Add WEEDS as new Level 1 category.• Recommend Food Type/Raw material as the

Level 2 option for FOOD (rather than Plant parts).

Society for Economic Botany Biocultural Collections Meeting June 2013

• Two opposing points of view:– Need for a simple, hierarchical, structured,

comprehensive system of non-overlapping terms.– Need a less structured approach based on vocabulary

alone with no hierarchies, or groups of terms only synonyms.

• The majority of the discussion covered new methods for handling vocabularies:– Ontologies, semantic web, proximity searching, use of

algorithms to make word associations, development of controlled vocabulary to develop lexicons etc.

Way forward?• Re-establish the former Economic Botany Interest Group perhaps as “Uses”

Interest Group and liaise with TDWG organisation?

• Motivation for the group– Agree vocabularies and systems for describing, recording and exchanging

information concerning the uses of organisms.– To enable use descriptions for both entire taxa and individual specimens.

• Activity focus– Short Term – Set up process to agree simplified version of structured Plant Use

Standard. Especially important to agree a stable top level.– Long Term – Review alternative novel approaches for handling vocabularies with

emerging IT technology.– Extend the remit from plants to all organisms.

Discussion at TDWG• Pros and cons of the existing prior standard:

– Additional views of users of the prior standard (or alternative systems); – Uses case examples;

• Review revised simplified version– Obtain potential reviewers of the new simplified version of the prior standard.

• Review novel IT approaches to vocabularies– Does TDWG have a view on how much emphasis should be placed on vocabulary

versus structure?– What emerging technologies are useful or recommended?– The merits and potential of semantic web, ontologies, proximity searching, use of

algorithms to make word associations, development of controlled vocabulary to develop lexicons etc.

• Is there the capability or capacity to extend beyond Plant uses only?

Thank you!

Mark Jackson (M.Jackson@kew.org)