Check sample depths on following sites (some missing, some dodgy?)

[visead]

Check sample depths on following sites:
SITE000128
SITE000167
SITE000230 - probably OK, just with a big gap
SITE000334
SITE000360

Some countsheets in
SITE000130

CHECKED TO SITE000363

[visead]

La Grande Pile depths corrected from meters to cm.
Check Bole Ings SITE000067 for same problem...

[visead]

Lobsigensee SITE000360 dataset 2 COUN000698 should be split into two datasets for the different sampling intervals. see notes in reference and BugsCEP. 90-130cm is 10cm slices. 0-110cm is 5cm slices. The Bugs samples do not make this clear and original publication needs consultation. Dating my be available too.
Note that dataset 1 might include a summary of selected taxa from dataset 2...

[visead]

SITE000330 La Taphanel sample depths and possibly dates should be extractable from the references - French reference is online, other one needs finding

[visead]

Washingborough SITE000912 depths might be available for more sections - see CD with publication.
Current depths need checking - could be positive height from baseline.
Also check different columns and for duplicate data.

[visead]

Goldcliff 2007 SITE000922 check for duplicate or superseded data. Check also for direction of sample depths (+ or - up or down)

[visead]

Done to sample SAMP007383
Check earlier corrections for mistakes on top and bottom use, plus m vs cm (e.g. La Grande Pile)

[visead]

Check Barmston SITE000970 sample top and bottoms for direction of + and -

[visead]

Complete data info for Lac des Lauzons SITE001143 from publication, including lab nrs from online supplementary data. NOTE TOP AND BOTTOM IN WRONG ORDER IN BUGS.
"Radiocarbon dates.Eleven AMS radiocarbon datings were performed on bulk sediment and plant macro-remains (Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry, Tucson, Arizona) (Table S1 online, Figure 4). The ages indicated on the figures are calibrated. The interpolated age–depth model (Figure 8) was created using the package CLAM (Blaauw, 2010) in the software R (R Development Core Team, 2010). The dates 6370 ± 102 cal. BP and 6021 ± 108 cal. BP are inversed and are excluded from the interpolated line because of the uncertainty in the simultaneity of their age with the encompassing sediment (transported old wood)."

[visead]

Check depth direction for Dagenham: Hornchurch Marshes Site 2 SITE001306

[visead]

Check depths for site SITE001311 Hatfield Moor: Torne TS1, especially Sample S1
Negative numbers are probably depth, but check.
SITE001312 Wroot may also have negative depths

[visead]

Finished to sample SAMP007451

[visead]

Check site Hemington LG MG SITE001072 against original report. Could be dates given in:
Greenwood, M.T., Wood, P.J. and Monk, W.A., 2006. The use of fossil caddisfly assemblages in the reconstruction of flow environments from floodplain paleochannels of the River Trent, England. Journal of Paleolimnology, 35(4), pp.747-761. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10933-005-5162-6

Samples H0-5 to H75-85?
H10 Late glacial cut off channel
RC 11775±80 BP (AA35115) 11725±80 BP (AA35116) 10960±110 BP (AA35117) 11735±75 BP (AA35118)

[visead]

Could probably get depths and approx dates from SITE001443 Lascaux. See paper https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018216000730?via%3Dihub#s0130

[visead]

Checked to SAMP008739