Page 1 of 1

Entry of BRC codes - a source of error

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:19 pm
by AndyAmphlett
Hi,

a source of error in plant records on the DDb, which VCRs should be aware of, results from erroneous entry of BRC codes. I have just dealt with an example while validating records. There were three records for the very rare alien Silene alpestris for vc94. Not being able to trace the records I suspected an error. The BRC code for this species is 8222. Inserting a decimal point before the last number, ie. 822.2 gives the BRC code for Festuca filiformis. A quick check revealed that the records for S. alpestris matched ones for F. filiformis. I have marked the vc94 records for S. alpestris as Rejected.

I have come across this problem several times, where a rare taxon has a very similar BRC code to something much commoner. Another good example are a cluster of 5 hectad dots for Carex x boenninghausiana (C. paniculata x remota) Code = 351 in NE Scotland, which were published in the Atlas, and which actually refered to Agrostis vinealis (Brown Bent) Code = 35.1. In the case of vc94, computerisation of records for the Atlas was not done directly by the VCR, and some errors such as these crept in to the final dataset. VCRs validating older records, or who enter records using BRC code numbers would be well to bear this type of error in mind.

Andy.

Re: Entry of BRC codes - a source of error

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:51 pm
by qgroom
Thanks Andy,
it's a good point and a reminder to keep the validation switched on during data entry, where its available.
Quentin