Embedded Files
Introduction of new external LWG members:
Virginia Edgcomb, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Lester Lembke-Jene, Alfred Wegner Institute
Thank you!! We value your contributions and feedback!
Sample Types and Tests in Database
Problem: Many sample types and tests are in the database system; however, several are obsolete.
Dropdowns have A LOT of options
Not proposing to remove from database – only update Sample Master
A list of sample types and tests are needed for Geodesc and the Sample Master replacement project
Goal: remove obsolete sample types and tests
a) Sample Type
REMOVE: Hole, Core, Section, SP, STS
CLTR move to tests; do not remove
Add TSB(??)
MBIO sample/test divisions rather than just “MBIO”
Can add extra info to comments field; however, limited room on sample label for including this information (20 characters)
Comments about sample treatment – storage, etc. are important
Microbiologists want to know how sample has been preserved
Add a new field in Sample Master to accommodate this information
To search in LIMS, would need a new filter
Also requires consistent entry by users
This will impact the Geochemistry Lab Working Group and the two groups must closely coordinate
ACTION ITEM: Katerina, Paul, Michelle, etc. will explore this and come back to the LWG with recommendations
b) Tests
Add CLTR
Remove CLU, CON_MASS, H2, MSPH, PCS, PFR, NOTESTS, STRX, TCH4, RMS
FORAMS – only keeping FORAM in dropdown list; Remove, FORAM, FORAMP, FORAMB
ACTION ITEM: Ginny will make a list of Microbiology tests that are needed in the drop-down menu. Emily will work with her to coordinate the Microbiology test recommendations made in the Microbiology tech note
Suggestion: Do not allow scientists to free enter tests, only curators, LO, ALOs – make a controlled field
ACTION ITEM: Curatorial staff will evaluate and discuss with Paul
Suggestion: Move TSB to sample, not a test
TS/TSB seem to be entered inconsistently in Sample Master
TSB can also be sent to XRD lab for XRF/XRD and be labeled as TSB
ACTION ITEM: Curators and ALOs will discuss
c) Tools
Remove BLADE, BORER, MINI_UCHIN
3. Consistent Terminology for Non-Cored Samples
Non-cored samples, such as junk baskets, CORK scrapings, and borehole water samples, are logged in Sample Master inconsistently
Goal: Develop consistent method for logging non-cored samples
Geochemistry LWG borehole water sampling recommendations:
On Expedition 385 a tool run number was added to the sample name field
Proposed that a “run” field be added to the Catwalk module of the Sample Master Replacement project. This would make the field searchable. However, this requires a larger discussion for the LIMS database and LORE reports. Also, “run” needs to show up in the Sample Table module to find parents.
One idea is to have a specific tool run LORE report for a given Expedition. This would require users to know where to go to find this information, which may not be easily identified. This report could include all tool runs.
Another idea is to include a check box for non-cored samples in LORE.
Potentially implement a rule that if a sample is not from a core, there must be a run number entered.
ACTION ITEM: Michelle will talk to Paul about what is possible in LIMS.
ACTION ITEM: Michelle will summarize this discussion with a proposed best idea(s) and circulate
4. Curatorial Cookbook
Updated Fall 2020
Can be found internally at IODP_Share > Curation
5. Other Business
Subsample Offsets in a Section
For TS and splits of PAL samples, the offsets are 0-X cm, the offsets of the parent sample. This can be confusing for scientists who will think this is the interval in the Section, not offset within the sample.
There could be a column added in LORE that documents “offset in section”.
We could treat these samples like IW subsamples, which inherit the intervals of the IW sample.
ACTION ITEM: Someone in curation will write up a best practices doc and distribute for feedback.
Page updated
Report abuse