bijux-pollenomics-data

bijux-pollenomics-data is the public handbook for the evidence side of the repository. It explains what kinds of material this project uses, what each kind can actually tell you, and how a visible report row or map point is tied back to narrower evidence.

This is the right place to start when your first questions are practical and evidence-first:

• what material is actually in scope here?
• where does it come from, and why was it selected?
• which parts are mature public context and which parts remain partial?
• how can one public row be traced back to narrower governing evidence?
• could this repository already help with a new country, region, or evidence question you care about?

Use this section when the real question is about evidence, coverage, or trust. It should help you understand what the repository knows today, what remains incomplete, and how the public publications stay tied to the evidence behind them.

Start with the system See the source families Follow the evidence chain See maps and reports Open the data architecture handbook Open the publication model Open the cross-domain evidence matrix

What You Will Find Here

flowchart TB
    sources["source families"]
    intake["tracked intake and recovery"]
    evidence["sample, locality, date, and coordinate evidence"]
    publications["country reports and atlas views"]

    sources --> intake
    intake --> evidence
    evidence --> publications

The point of this handbook is to keep those stages readable. You should not have to reverse-engineer the difference between a source paper, a normalized evidence file, a locality decision, and a public map point.

That also applies to the Sweden lake program. If a reader sees a ranked lake, they should be able to tell whether that row comes from source intake, evidence review, publication scoring, or a fieldwork-oriented shortlist rather than guessing from a map label alone.

What Makes This Repository Unusual

Most data projects explain one evidence family at a time. This repository does not. It brings several different families into one public system:

• pollen context from large environmental databases
• archaeology context from environmental and heritage sources
• boundary layers used for framing and filtering
• human ancient DNA release material
• animal ancient DNA recovery work that is still being strengthened project by project

In practice, that means this section has to explain how those families work together without pretending they all mean the same thing. A pollen context row, a heritage context row, a human aDNA locality, and an animal recovery record can all appear in one publication family while still carrying different scientific weight.

That mixed setting is useful, but it becomes misleading fast if the explanation is vague. Readers need to know whether they are looking at mature evidence, supporting context, or work that is still under recovery. They also need boundary framing, chronology posture, coordinate precision, and sampling posture to stay explicit, because those details change what a public map can honestly imply.

What You Can Use This Handbook For

• deciding whether a public map or report is enough for your question
• finding the narrower evidence surface behind a public output
• understanding why one source family supports broad use while another stays caveated
• understanding how the Sweden lake ranking packet is derived and what it does not claim
• learning how the same evidence system could support future publication for other countries or regions without inventing a second product model

Start Here

• System: understand the overall model before the file details
• Sources: see what each source family contributes and what it cannot honestly answer
• Evidence: follow the chain from sample record to locality, chronology, and coordinates
• Publications: learn what the published report tree shows and what it intentionally does not promote
• Data architecture handbook: learn where truth lives and how capture, normalization, review, and publication differ
• Cross-domain evidence matrix: compare the repository's evidence balance without relying on file counts alone

Restored System Coverage

• provenance and publication linkage
• source selection and refresh
• coverage and naming

Source-Family Comparison

Start with the source-family comparison when the main question is source comparison across pollen, archaeology, boundaries, human aDNA, and animal aDNA. That page is the fastest way to understand why two layers can appear on the same map while still answering very different questions.

Common Questions

• Where does the repository's pollen, archaeology, boundary, and aDNA material come from?
• What happens between a paper or dataset and a public-facing output?
• Which animal records already have sample-level locality and date evidence?
• Why is one row publishable while another stays blocked or uncertain?
• What could I responsibly reuse for a region that is not yet published as a map atlas surface?

A Good Reading Order

If you are new to the project, read this section in the same order that the repository handles evidence:

1. start with the system guide to understand the overall shape
2. move to sources to see what enters the repository
3. move to evidence to see how claims are justified
4. finish with publications to see how public-facing bundles are derived

That order is deliberate. The publications only make full sense once the source and evidence stages are clear.

Section Map

Section	Main question	Main pages
System	How is the repository's data system structured?	overview
Sources	What source families are in scope and what do they contribute?	sources
Evidence	How are sample, locality, chronology, and coordinate claims justified?	evidence
Publications	What reaches reports and maps, and what remains partial?	publications