Reports¶

Reports are the main written surfaces of the public product. They are where the repository gives a guided answer at world, regional, or country scope without forcing a reader to reconstruct the story from raw files.

If you want the clearest narrative answer this repository can currently give, start here. Reports are the place where scope, evidence, caveats, and public wording are brought together on purpose.

How The Report Tree Is Organized¶

docs/report/index.md is the public entry point
docs/report/world/ is the broadest shared answer
docs/report/regions/europe-plus/ and docs/report/regions/nordic/ are intermediate regional views
docs/report/countries/<country-slug>/ holds the narrowest country bundles

That structure matters because a country report should feel like a narrower answer inside one larger evidence system, not like a disconnected mini-product.

Where To Start¶

open the report portal if you do not yet know which scope you need
open the world evidence surface if you want the broadest current answer
open the Europe-plus evidence surface if your question is regional but wider than one country
open the Nordic evidence surface if your question is specifically Nordic
open a country bundle such as Sweden only when the question is genuinely country-specific
open a country-scoped analytic surface such as Sweden lake evidence richness when the question is about ranked context density around one country's candidate basins rather than the broader country narrative alone
open a direct sample-level bundle such as Sweden animal aDNA v66 samples when the question is about the currently published country sample surface, not only the narrative landing page
open the animal output honesty, animal atlas exclusion report, or repository truth posture if you need the public caveat surfaces beside the narrative bundle

What Each Scope Is Good For¶

world answers: what the repository can already publish across the widest geography without pretending that every local detail is solved
regional answers: what a reusable shared geography such as Europe-plus or Nordic looks like when the reader needs more focus than the world view
country answers: what one national bundle looks like once the scope is narrowed and the reader wants the most locally usable public package
country analytic sidecars: what one country publishes when a derived ranking or scored context table needs to stay inspectable beside the bundle rather than hidden inside prose

How To Choose The Right Report¶

start broad unless you already know the question is country-bound
treat the world page as the posture-setting surface, not as a replacement for regional or country nuance
move from world to region when geography matters more than the broad mixed-evidence overview
move from region to country when local detail, citations, or national framing is the real goal
move sideways into review pages when the visible bundle looks stronger than the evidence probably deserves

What A Good Report Should Give You¶

a scoped narrative that says what this geography currently shows
visible limits and caveats rather than hidden optimism
links to maps, reviews, and supporting public evidence
direct analytic outputs when the scope includes ranked or scored evidence rather than only a narrative landing page
stable paths so readers can revisit the same scope later without guessing where it moved

Review Companions¶

Use these beside the main bundle when the question is about strength rather than description:

The Scope Rule¶

The report tree is meant to make scope easier to understand, not easier to overclaim. If a narrow report sounds more certain than the wider evidence system behind it, the narrow report should lose the argument.