Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
May 9, 2016 at 5:25 pm
Greetings from your coordinator and SSG co-chairs. We will post brief summaries of our ~weekly meetings to this forum and as comments within this forum. For feedback please email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
May 2, 2016
Luke reported on the revised web page for ISCN, which now allows for blogging and forums. The new web site has an interactive map if users want to specify regional or local scales for their inquiry. Under the heading Partner Networks, long-term soil experiments have created a shared and awesome new interactive map where folks will be able to navigate, download, and enter data for their experimental sites. Upcoming: New overlay data for air and soil climate are being prepared by colleagues from the Max Planck Institute, Biogeochemistry.
Gustaf reported on recent activities with a new application for an International Permafrost Association Action group on periglacial processes and soil C cycling. We see great potential future synergies with the ISCN. Gustaf reported that an upcoming workshop in Washington DC will partly focus on the use of soil C data for model benchmarking and development, more to come as this progresses.
Jen reported on last month’s EGU meeting where she presented a poster (click on Blogs-what’s new) on behalf of recent database contributors/users and received vibrant support for our growing network. Jen is working with Avni Malhotra on the recent ISCN survey and they will report findings to leaders and members within the next week or so.
Action Items before next week: Luke, web site entries; Luke and Jen, discuss data templates tailored for soil chronosequences; Gustaf, report on recommendations for DOI for datasets and database versioning.
May 11, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Summary of meeting on May 9th, 2016
Luke and Jen discussed recent progress with regards to the development of database templates tailored to the demands of soil chronosequence data.
We discussed the development of the first generation of ISCN action groups, including how to gage readiness for data/synthesis engagement, how to best solicit the engagement of the wider community, what topics are emerging from the community, and at which stage of a research project an action group constellation should be at to be effective. The task force for action groups will review and discuss results of the survey, which will be posted on the ISCN website for all members.
We discussed recent progress with the process of issuing a DOI for the ISCN database. We are very happy with recent developments and optimistic that this can be resolved in a timely manner.
Gustaf reported on an upcoming workshop in Washington DC for the ILAMB (International Land Model Benchmarking) project in mid-May. One of many topics at this workshop will be how to effectively use observational soil C data in support of model development. A white-paper workshop report with open input from the scientific community will be released. This is of great interest to the ISCN and more will follow after the workshop.
Action items for this week: Jen, finalize and prepare dissemination of ISCN member survey. Luke, work on soil chronosequence data templates. Gustaf, formulate short text about DOIs for webpage and follow up on the ILAMB workshop report and possibilities for ISCN input.
May 16, 2016 at 9:42 pm
Luke and Jen met by phone with Avni Malhotra to review results of the April member survey which was summarized by Avni and is available online (http://iscn.fluxdata.org/community/highlight/member-survey-results/). Respondents (about 20% of membership) were mostly from USA which we thought was not reflective of general membership. Detailed written responses/input represent about 10% of membership. This survey was informative for future action groups, web communications, and helping to better align activities with targeted needs of C management and global C science communities.
Website and template issues were discussed briefly.
June 3, 2016 at 8:18 pm
We are working with the task force for forming Action Groups.The task force includes Jen, Gustaf, Johannes Lehmann, Randy Kolka, Avni Malhotra, and Marc Kramer. Our purpose is to empower members to meet, collaborate, share and impact the larger societal mission of our research Please watch under community “collaboration opportunities” for whatour solicitation.
Meanwhile we are discussing where and when our next annual meeting will occur. We’re thinking AGU fall meeting, perhaps the Saturday or Sunday Dec 10 or 11. Feedback welcome. Another smaller workshop is also being discussed (TBD)
June 10, 2016 at 11:18 am
Summary of meeting on June 6th, 2016
Jen, Luke and Gustaf met in a teleconference.
Luke provided an update of recent activities, including website updates and work on grants and proposals.
We discussed the progression of the ISCN Action Groups and the great benefit we had of the recent ISCN member survey. Jen talked about how we can best take advantage of the ideas, know-how and energy that emerged from some of the survey responses.
Jen has gotten in direct contact with those respondents that provided direct suggestions in response to the question: “Can you think of some issues that would benefit from data compilations and data-model syntheses in the next year or two?”
Action Items for June:
1. Schedule SSG phone meeting for late July or early August for review of Action Group applications.
2. In anticipation of an ISCN meeting the weekend before the 2016 AGU fall meeting: reserve a room at suitable venue.
1. Review status of getting a DOI for the ISCN database
1. Follow up on action group emails and postings
2. Follow up on potentially updating the variables included in the ISCN database and adding pyrophosphate extractable C
June 27, 2016 at 9:20 pm
Summary of Meeting June 27, 2016
Jen, Gustaf, and Luke met by teleconference and talked about progress of Action Group solicitation. No proposals have been submitted, but there seem to be common themes of interest that emerged from the recent survey. We also discussed ideas for both the annual meeting and a workshop. Manuscript preparation; proposal writing ; programming issues; template design issues; and invited speakers were all on the table as possible goals. In July, we hope to work with AG leads and make some headway on planning for both the meeting and workshop. We also talked about Jen and Gustaf traveling in 2016 to Wageningen to visit with leaders of ISRIC in order to explore synergies and support for both ISCN and ISRIC.
July 7, 2016 at 7:24 am
Jen and Gustaf talked, mainly about action group proposals and plans for the fall term.
Some action group proposals have come in and two or three more are pending. Jen will reach out to key individuals to give them a final reminder.
When all proposals are in, Jen will gather the task force on action group formation to discuss the final selection. We will also reach out to the whole ISCN-SSG via email to inform them and solicit any feedback on the process.
We discussed proposed travel plans to ISRIC, Wageningen, Netherlands, and agreed that travel in September for both of us will be difficult. Plan to invite ISRIC representatives to Stanford or propose a later visit by us there.
We discussed further practical plans for a smaller ISCN workshop as well as an all-hands meeting of the ISCN in association with the AGU Fall Meeting. We discussed the scope of these meetings and to which extent we should focus on distinct products, actions groups, collaborations or visions for the future.
Gustaf will look into the plans for open review on an upcoming ILAMB white paper to see if this is something that may be of interest to ISCN-members
Before end of July we need to announce the all-hands AGU meeting via the list-serv email.
July 18, 2016 at 9:33 pm
Jen, Gustaf, and Luke discussed Action Group proposals, including impact on ISCN resources, relative merit to ISCN utility and impact, and perceived readiness for engaging the ISCN community. We discussed the timing, venue, and tentative agenda for the All Hands meeting in SF the day before AGU (Sunday Dec 11) and agreed to send an email for “save the date” to members. Jen’s Cox Visiting Professorship will fund the 1 day meeting in SF. Meanwhile, the task force is meeting by phone this week to review each Action Group proposal and will make recommendations to the Science Steering Group within the week.
August 1, 2016 at 7:57 pmParticipant
Jen and Luke talked about AGU planning and beyond. AGU abstracts are rolling in for the many soil C and soil organic matter sessions, and several Action Group leaders have RSVP’d for the pre-AGU All Hands Meeting on Sunday, 11 December. Click here <https://www.surveymonkey.com/survey-taken/?sm=9hNzxFsNm_2FiZiK6P_2BIsGxe2P6j3xB3sqZ9TTY860HeRfmwgg1grYd2kTLUmA4iy5kqYj6Ky0W4ugL95l3_2FmkXQ_3D_3D> to RSVP if you would like to attend and participate in this major next step of defining ISCN projects and priorities, in terms of database growth, data user needs, etc. Jen and Luke also discussed plans for a workshop, supported by Jen’s visiting scholar position at Stanford, for winter/spring 2017. The workshop will be a targeted event to either produce a paper, proposal, or data synthesis surrounding ISCN Action Group topics.
September 12, 2016 at 8:04 pmParticipant
After a hiatus due to various travels, the three of us chatted today on a variety of topics. I updated Jen and Gustaf on scheduling AGU sessions, which are looking VERY good for anyone with an interest in soil C, and on dataset posting on the Access Data portion of the website. Recent and ongoing data contributions are now being posted in template form on the ISCN website, in order to increase the rate at which datasets become available. This is especially important for datasets that need to be posted online as a precondition for publication. Speaking of publications, Jen mentioned a Science paper that is in press (she is a coauthor) that comes from a collaborative effort to compile and analyze soil radiocarbon data.
Jen and Gustaf shared updates and ideas for the pre-AGU ISCN All Hands meeting, scheduled for Sunday 11 December. Among other things, the three of us discussed breakout group topics, which will likely include: 1) designing and adapting data synthesis templates; 2) developing a forum for data users and data use issues; 3) encouraging data users to share their own analysis datasets and insights into navigating the database. Jen and Gustaf also enumerated plans for a February/March Action Group Workshop, which is intended to produce a paper and a proposal related to soil carbon.
November 21, 2016 at 9:18 pm
Monday Nov 21:
Luke, Jen, and Avni discussed attendees to SF meeting and newly emerging synergies with networks and working groups. Soil data from several Fluxnet sites and from certain Critical Zone Observatories may be ermerging as new ISCN data contributors. We hope to enlist more “process based” datasets such as chronosequence, land-use sequences, and climo-sequences; advancing the afternoon discussions on template and database structure at the SF meeting will hopefully make these efforts timely and effective.
We’d also like to identify modeling groups interested in soil carbon that would benefit from cross-linking and cross-collaborating – any ideas out there?
1 week from today, we plan to announce on-line forums for each of our Action Groups and ‘business plan’ items so that all ISCN members can contribute to our SF meeting whether in the flesh or on the ethernet.
November 28, 2016 at 10:01 pm
Monday Dec 2: Luke, Jen, Gustaf discussed community forum for Action Group and collaboration topics; once the Grazing Lands forum is posted (ding ding ding), we’ll send out an all-member email inviting folks to join the discussions before our SF meeting. This will be an opportunity for non-attendees to contribute input.
We accepted and invitation to list the link for THE INTERNATIONAL SOIL MODELING CONSORTIUM (https://soil-modeling.org/governance) on our web page and invited consortium leaders and members to attend our SF meeting.
Next week when Chris Swanston joins our phone conference, we’ll discuss ISCN coordinator responsibilities, aspirations, and future roles.
Gustaf recapped his recent interactions with modeling communities and stressed the importance for ISCN members to align questions with good model bench-marking questions/demonstrations so that data can be more clearly useful in constructing better, more testable models. It is becoming increasingly clear that ISCN has a niche to fill in demonstrating soil processes through data sets with isotopic and strategic, process-based sampling .
Last, we discussed the need to coordinate with our Action Group leads in preparation for our breakout groups in SF.
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.