Doug, I think keeping the maps updated would be useful. I'm not sure there could be a "too often". Thanks for all you do. Larry From: s137@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To: tn-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [tn-moths] Re: TN moth documentation map Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 12:54:21 -0500 Jean, you're right. It really takes two maps to show the whole moth picture: an "absolute" map (like yesterday), and a "progress" map, scaled in such a way that individual contributions can be seen. Here's the current moth information displayed with much smaller increments and a greatly restricted scale: http://www.mapsgeek.com/map/kwmndqmg8bbt09u5 If there's interest, I could update these maps and post a link whenever there is a major change in the BAMONA data. I expect that this might be every month or two after BAMONA catches up from last summer. Is that too often? I don't want to turn this listserv into "tn-maps." - Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: Jean Obrist To: tn-moths@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:29 AM Subject: [tn-moths] Re: TN moth documentation map Thank you, Doug. Maybe we need to use smaller increments to start. We could see progress better that way. Jean Obrist Cocke Co, TN ----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Bruce To: TN Moths Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 6:32 AM Subject: [tn-moths] TN moth documentation map Per the suggestion of Steve Stedman and Larry McDaniel, here is a map showing the status of BAMONA moth documentation in each of the counties of Tennessee. This first version isn't very useful, though, because of my choice for category ranges. http://www.mapsgeek.com/map/jq7mqysc3ez8fgxy Choosing the category ranges was a dilemma. This first version of the moth map is scaled to be roughly equivalent to the (revised) butterfly map. That is, it displays the same number of categories and the same colors, with the scale proportioned so that the maximum* category represents the same idea as the butterfly map: meaning something like "virtually complete documentation except for strays." Unfortunately, the resulting map is useful only for establishing a baseline against which future iterations of the map can be compared, since the moth documentation effort in Tennessee is much less complete than the butterflying effort. Only the two bottom categories are actually displayed; subjectively, they mean "no documentation" and "very incomplete documentation." This situation will change soon. When BAMONA catches up with Larry's efforts, at least one county will be pushing up close to the 400-species category. I expect that others will follow shortly. Doug Bruce Oak Ridge, TN Anderson Co. * Charles V. Covell, Jr. (1999) lists 2388 taxa in The Butterflies and Moths (Lepidoptera) of Kentucky, and states that there might be another 300-400 species beyond that. I'm assuming that Tennessee and Kentucky will have similar statewide totals: ~2600 species. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/