Dear Susan Farrington, I have used PDAs developed by Palm to collect vegetation data for several projects (over 500 sites this year alone) and have had very few problems. We have used SmartList in the past, which takes a little time to get accustomed to and to also set it up so the data downloads are formatted correctly. We generally add a "Notes" text field at the bottom of each screen so that we can write in whatever is needed. Some people do have problems writing on PDAs, but I've noticed misspellings tend to be due to carelessness (which can be alleviated with 'data correctness' or 'fewest errors' contests) or due to the enterer not knowing how to actually spell. If your crews are young enough, they will pick up on the PDAs very quickly.
>From SmartList, the files can be exported to Excel, Access, or left as 'text.' You will still need someone to go through and double-check entries at the office, but someone would need to double-check the entries from paper sheets as well. We've found that trying to record data simultaneously on paper and in the PDA's only creates bigger messes as the crews tend to be distracted by the multiple data forms. Several researchers have used DocumentsToGo instead of Smartlist because DocumentsToGo allows you to enter directly into Excel or Word and also allows for complicated calculations while in the field. There are probably other programs designed for PDAs not made by Palm that may perform better than the two I've mentioned, but these are the ones with which I am familiar. In general, we've been able to obtain PDA's for under $200 but the newer ones tend to fail after one field season. Oddly enough, the older PDAs that have gone through 3-4 field seasons work far better than the newer ones. I assume this is due to poorer quality. I hope this information along with other individuals' replies help! Sincerely, Jennifer Brickey Botanist Eastern Nevada Landscape Coalition P. O. Box 150266 Ely, NV 89315 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 775-289-7974 ext. 7# -----Original Message----- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan Farrington Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:18 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Electronic data collection for botany data I am investigating the possiblities for using electronic data loggers for botany data collection for the Missouri Ozark Forest Ecosystem Project (MOFEP), and would love any input from those who have used them. I have used a GEO-XT for inputting woody overstory and understory data, but not for botanical data. We will be collecting data from 1m2 quadrats, recording all species encountered, percent cover, and stem counts for woody seedlings. We'll also be counting berries present for soft mast species. Up until now we have recorded data on paper, using 8-letter codes for each species. I have several major concerns in considering the electronic option: even though I know it will save a great amount of data entry time at the end of the season, I cannot afford to slow down our data collection at all: we have to visit 648 plots in a limited time period! Secondly, I know how easy it is to mistype something, and I see no way to error check the data... having the original paper to check data by gives me great piece of mind. Finally, the new method must allow the workers to easily "jot notes" in the logger for comments, explanations, etc. If a botanist forgets the scientific name, a note saying "pokeberry" instead of "phytamer" still allows me to identify the plant. If it's slow or cumbersome to write notes, the workers WON'T give us helpful notes. I will have 12 botanists, and will need 12 data logging devices if we go this route, so the units must be affordable. I could see requesting $300 PDA units, but not $1000 or $2000 Ranger units. Any advice or comments would be greatly appreciated!
