no_of_individuals,/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/aggregateOrganismObservation[*ID]/*/aggregateValue/value,"Brad: Incorrect for VegX. This is a count of number of indiiduals for an *aggregate* observation. For VegBank, I'm not sure. Not exactly the same as stemCount. An individual tree could have 3 stems but would still only count as 1. We need to check with Bob on this."

det_type,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=collector]/groupType","Brad: A SALVIAS value referring to the relationship between the voucher specimen and the observation. Affect how the identification of the specimen(latin name) is transferred to the observation. 'direct'=voucher specimen was collected from this same tree; they are one and the same individual. 'indirect'=voucher specimen was collected for a different individual, but the original data provider confirmed that this is the same species. 'default'=basically same as 'indirect'. 'uncollected'=no voucher specimen, data provider  asserted that this was the name but was unable to collect. The main different is that with 'direct', 'indirect', and 'default', the scientific name can be updated automatically based on the name attached to the specimen voucher (assuming you have a link to that data, presumably from a herbarium database. Whereas, if det_type='uncollected', the name can never change because there is no specimen."

coll_firstname,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=collector]/partyWithRole/*ID->/parties/party/individualName/givenName",Brad: See comment above

coll_lastname,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=collector]/partyWithRole/*ID->/parties/party/individualName/surName","Brad: Correct for VegBank. This is the collector of a separate specimen which vouchers this tree or species. I worry that vouchers are not properly accommodated in VegX. Again, we need to check with Nick."

infra_ep_1,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=computer]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=TaxonomicRankBelowSubspeciesEnum])/tcs:Name",

infra_rank_1,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=computer]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=TaxonomicRankBelowSubspeciesEnum])/tcs:Rank",

specific_authority,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=computer]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=auth])/tcs:Name",Brad: Incorrect. This is the author of the scientificName. The should be a place for this in the taxonomic name elements of VegB and VegX. Let's discuss.

family,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=computer]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=fam])/tcs:Name",

genus,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=computer]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=gen])/tcs:Name",

specific_epithet,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=computer]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=sp])/tcs:Name",

orig_species,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=identifier]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=binom])/tcs:Name/_name/last",Brad: OMIT

cf_aff,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=identifier]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=binom])/{fit,tcs:Name/_name/middle}","Brad: Not sure where this goes. Indicator of identification uncertainty. 'cf.'=similar to the species listed, 'aff.'=related to the species list, but not the same. You'll need to check with Bob and with Nick where these go in VegX and VegBank."

orig_family,"/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept->/*s/taxonDetermination[*ID,partyWithRole/role=identifier]/*s/taxonRelationshipAssertion(/assertion/*ID->/*s/taxonConcept[tcs:Rank/@code=fam])/tcs:Name",Brad: OMIT

notes,/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept/note/text,

coll_number,/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept:[partyWithRole/*ID->/parties/party/organizationName=$/_ignore/inLabel]/voucher/_alt/1,Brad: Incorrect. Map instead as for voucher_string

voucher_string,/*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept:[partyWithRole/*ID->/parties/party/organizationName=$/_ignore/inLabel]/voucher/_alt/2,"Brad: OMIT. This is the verbatim text, which includes both collectors name and collection number. I would use coll_number, below."

OBSERVATION_ID,:[*ID->/*s/individualOrganism/*sID->/*s/taxonNameUsageConcept/partyWithRole/*ID->/parties/party/organizationName=$/_ignore/inLabel]/simpleUserdefined[name=sourceAccessionCode]/value,"Brad: Neither is correct; this is just an internal ID for table plotObservations. However, it has the important property of uniquely identifying an ""observation"", which is an individual tree, in the case of an individual observation, or a records of a species with an associated count of individuals or measurement of percent cover, in the case of aggregate observations. Not sure where to store this. Main point is that it is not part of the original data, but an auto_increment added later."