Neotoma¶

Neotoma supplies primary pollen context as normalized palaeoecological site records. It complements LandClim with a site-centered view, but temporal support varies by record and remains distinct from a captured chronology model.

Its pollen-site context is governed at the site and dataset levels. A public point can orient a reader to a place, while dataset identity and the temporal review determine whether the record supports spatial context, bounded temporal comparison, or no numeric-time claim.

Checked-In Evidence¶

The current temporal review covers 200 normalized sites:

Posture	Count	Interpretation
site has a numeric BP span	175	bounded site-level comparison is possible under the recorded caveat
site lacks a BP span	25	spatial context only
captured chronology rows	0	the snapshot does not provide a separate chronology-row foundation

Within the review, 63 records are numeric intervals, 107 are numeric intervals with caveats, 5 retain contextual labels only, and 25 remain unresolved. These categories are more informative than calling all 200 sites “dated.”

Curation Lineage¶

Boundary	Governing material	Decision preserved
dataset acquisition	`raw/neotoma_pollen_dataset_downloads/manifest.json` and its captured parts	which downloaded responses belong to the snapshot
dataset inventory	`raw/neotoma_pollen_dataset_inventory.json`	dataset identity and coverage represented by the capture
site capture	`raw/neotoma_pollen_sites.json`	source site records before family normalization
site normalization	`normalized/nordic_pollen_sites.geojson`	stable spatial members used by public products
temporal review	`review/temporal_review.json`	numeric, caveated, contextual, or unresolved time posture per site

The download bundle is preserved separately from the normalized map layer so a reader can distinguish what the source returned from what the product admits. A normalized point is therefore inspectable as a transformation, not presented as an unexplained database export.

Dataset And Site Are Different Identity Levels¶

A Neotoma site can expose one or more dataset records, while a dataset can carry age-range statements, contributor notes, and lineage that do not belong to the site name alone. Preparation therefore retains both levels:

Identity level	What it owns	Unsafe collapse
site	stable place-oriented source identity and reported geometry	treating the display name as a universal pollen-sequence key
dataset	dataset identity, type, contributor and source notes, and captured age coverage	merging several datasets into one unexplained site interval
normalized site member	repository spatial member plus summarized temporal posture	presenting the summary as a chronology or age-depth model
temporal review row	comparability decision and caveat for the current capture	inheriting family-wide time eligibility

flowchart LR
    Site["source site"] --> Member["normalized site member"]
    DatasetA["dataset identity A"] --> Coverage["captured age coverage"]
    DatasetB["dataset identity B"] --> Coverage
    Coverage --> Review["site temporal review"]
    Member --> Review
    Review --> Use["bounded or spatial-only use"]

The review can summarize a site for product use while the captured dataset inventory retains the members needed to challenge that summary.

flowchart LR
    Inventory["captured site and dataset inventory"] --> Site["normalized pollen site"]
    Site --> Span{"numeric BP span present?"}
    Span -->|yes| Bounded["bounded site-level comparison"]
    Span -->|no| Spatial["spatial context only"]
    Bounded --> Review["temporal comparability review"]
    Spatial --> Review
    Review --> Product["qualified pollen-context layer"]

What Neotoma Supports¶

site-centered pollen and palaeoenvironmental comparison;
cross-place context across the governed capture;
lake-linked or proximity-based pollen support under explicit spatial rules;
temporal comparison when the individual review row records a compatible numeric BP interval;
public context layers that preserve site identity and temporal posture.

Chronology Limit¶

A site span summarizes captured age coverage. It is not equivalent to a chronology table, age-depth model, or sample-level date. The current snapshot contains no chronology rows for this Sweden-facing family, so a site with a BP span may support a bounded comparison while still carrying a chronology caveat.

Units and interval semantics also matter. A numeric label is not accepted for comparison merely because it contains “BP”; the review posture records whether the value is compatible with repository temporal rules.

Site-Level Temporal Admission¶

Temporal eligibility is decided per normalized site, not inherited from the family name or the visual presence of a marker.

flowchart LR
    Site["normalized Neotoma site"] --> Review["temporal review row"]
    Review --> Class{"time posture"}
    Class -->|numeric compatible| Interval["bounded comparison"]
    Class -->|numeric caveated| Caveat["bounded comparison with caveat"]
    Class -->|contextual or unresolved| Spatial["spatial context only"]

For a temporal comparison, retain the site identifier, numeric bounds, unit and basis, review class, caveat, and the other member's compatible interval. For a spatial-only comparison, say explicitly that the site contributes pollen context without a numeric chronology claim. This prevents the 175 sites with captured spans from making the full 200-site layer appear uniformly dated.

Four Governed Outcomes¶

The checked-in review contains concrete examples of every temporal posture:

Site	Review outcome	Why
`13338` Abborrtjärnen	`numeric_interval`	one calibrated BP site span, `0–9815 BP`, is available
`12` Ageröds Mosse	`numeric_interval_with_caveat`	the site summary combines calibrated and uncalibrated radiocarbon BP conventions
`28859` Lake Vuolep Njakajaure	`contextual_label_only`	age coverage is visible, but the normalized record does not support repository numeric comparison
`2961` Aborregöl	`unresolved`	no age-range detail is available in the captured site review

flowchart TD
    Member["Neotoma site member"] --> Row["site temporal-review row"]
    Row --> Direct["Abborrtjärnen: numeric interval"]
    Row --> Caveat["Ageröds Mosse: mixed BP conventions"]
    Row --> Context["Vuolep Njakajaure: label only"]
    Row --> Unknown["Aborregöl: unresolved"]

These are not successive quality grades through which every site should move. They are claim-specific outcomes derived from the captured evidence. A site may remain useful spatial context even when numeric comparison is refused, and a broad numeric span does not substitute for the missing chronology rows.

Preserve The Admission Denominator¶

The 175 sites with a captured BP span are not the same population as sites admitted to numeric comparison. Admission is narrower:

Population	Count	Permitted use
captured site members	200	denominator for the governed Neotoma layer
members with a captured BP span	175	evidence that some temporal description was captured
admitted numeric intervals	63	bounded comparison under the recorded interval semantics
admitted numeric intervals with caveats	107	bounded comparison only when the caveat travels with the result
contextual labels only	5	spatial or descriptive context; no repository numeric comparison
unresolved time posture	25	spatial context only

Thus, 170 members currently enter numeric comparison, not 175 and not 200. The five contextual-label members are the important boundary case: source age coverage is visible, but the normalized review refuses to promote it into a repository numeric interval.

flowchart LR
    Layer["200 normalized sites"] --> Span["175 with captured BP spans"]
    Layer --> Unresolved["25 unresolved"]
    Span --> Numeric["170 admitted numeric intervals"]
    Span --> Labels["5 contextual labels only"]
    Numeric --> Plain["63 without added caveat"]
    Numeric --> Caveated["107 with caveat"]

Every summary must name its denominator. “Most Neotoma sites are dated” hides the distinction between captured labels, admitted comparison intervals, and sample chronology that this review exists to preserve.

Relationship To LandClim¶

Both families provide primary pollen context, but their normalized units and strengths differ:

LandClim combines site sequences with REVEALS grid context;
Neotoma centers the comparison on palaeoecological sites and their captured dataset coverage;
neither family replaces the other;
neither becomes direct sample evidence when displayed beside aDNA.

The two families are not guaranteed to be statistically independent. Captured Neotoma dataset notes include contributions associated with the LandClim project and the European Pollen Database. Before describing agreement as corroboration, compare source dataset identity, contributor, site, sequence, and age coverage. Two publication layers can be separate repository families while still representing one upstream observation lineage.

A direct LandClim–Neotoma comparison therefore pairs a LandClim site sequence with a Neotoma normalized site member and retains both temporal decisions. A REVEALS grid cell may provide model context for that pair, but it does not increase the count of site observations. If shared lineage cannot be excluded, the result is contextual agreement rather than independent corroboration.

Choose Neotoma For The Question¶

Question	Use	Retain with the claim
Which captured palaeoecological sites provide pollen context?	normalized site members	site and dataset identity plus publication scope
Can two records be compared in time?	the individual temporal-review row	bounds, units, review class, caveat, and comparison rule
Does a site's BP span constitute an age-depth model?	no	the span is site-level captured coverage, not sample chronology
Is absence from the layer evidence of no palaeoecological record?	no	capture and normalization scope must be checked first

Review A Refresh Across Identity Levels¶

Compare dataset membership before site membership. A dataset can change its contributor, chronology coverage, or site relation without creating a new site; conversely, a newly captured dataset can add evidence to a site already present. The refresh receipt therefore accounts for release and dataset IDs, site IDs, dataset-to-site relations, admitted temporal rows, exclusions, and published site members. Equal site counts cannot prove equal pollen evidence.

Governing Surfaces¶

data/neotoma/raw/neotoma_pollen_dataset_inventory.json records datasets;
data/neotoma/raw/neotoma_pollen_sites.json records captured sites;
data/neotoma/normalized/nordic_pollen_sites.geojson governs normalized spatial records;
data/neotoma/review/temporal_review.json governs temporal posture;
data/source_spatiotemporal_posture_registry.json summarizes cross-family comparison status.

A published Neotoma point inherits the posture of its governing review row, not a stronger interpretation suggested by map precision.