Report prepared by Avni Malhotra, Univ. Wisconsin and Jen Harden, ISCN SSG Chair
82 respondents (~20% of membership) as of May 6, 2016
Q1. Who are we? Mostly research scientists
Where are respondents located? Mostly in the USA
|Vermont (USA still maybe)||1|
Q2. In what capacity do you mainly work with soil C related issues?
C cycle research (82%)
Q3. What do you see as your primary reason for joining and retaining your ISCN membership?
Mixed: data accessing (29%) ; data archiving (31%) ; being in the know (41%)
Q4. What types of actions do you think ISCN should invest in supporting?
Mainly climate/ C cycle feedback research (85% including stabilization processes, spatial characterization, gradients)
Q5. Can you think of some issues that would benefit from data compilations and data-model syntheses in the next year or two?
|Inventory C stocks||14|
|Variability in soil carbon||14|
|Abiotic and biotic controls on SOC (across space and time)||10|
|Response to experiments||5|
|Data clean and ease of import||2|
Q6. Which of the following ISCN services and functions are most important to you?
Summaries of recent research (80%)
Q7. How would you rate ISCN services? Good (43), Fair (20%) do not use ISCN services 32%
Q8. In which way would you like to receive information from the ISCN?
Sendlist or Weekly/biweekly summaries (95%)
Q9. Where should we meet on annual basis?
Meetings should be scheduled around AGU (43%) and/or rotationally including AGU (40%)
Q.10 What should ISCN priorities be for the next 5 years?
More data contributions (10.84%)
Network meetings (16.87%)
Improving platform for data sharing (27.71% )
Informing and using database (22.89%)
Funding for soil carbon research (21.9%)