Hopp til hovedinnholdet

Publikasjoner

NIBIOs ansatte publiserer flere hundre vitenskapelige artikler og forskningsrapporter hvert år. Her finner du referanser og lenker til publikasjoner og andre forsknings- og formidlingsaktiviteter. Samlingen oppdateres løpende med både nytt og historisk materiale. For mer informasjon om NIBIOs publikasjoner, besøk NIBIOs bibliotek.

2023

Sammendrag

Overvåkingsprogrammet i 2022 omfattet undersøkelse for tilstedeværelse av furuvednematode (Bursaphelenchus xylophilus) i hogstavfall fra furu og i furubukker av slekten Monochamus. I OK-programmets delaktivitet som omfattet kartlegging av furuvednematode i hogstavfall, ble det tatt 401 flisprøver fra hogstavfall og vindfall av furu (Pinus sylvestris) som hadde tegn på angrep av furubukker i slekten Monochamus. Prøvene ble tatt i Innlandet, Vestfold og Telemark, og Viken. Flisprøvene ble inkubert ved +25°C i to uker før nematoder ble ekstrahert med Baermann-trakt og undersøkt i mikroskop. Furuvednematoden B. xylophilus ble ikke påvist, men den naturlig forekommende arten Bursaphelenchus mucronatus kolymensis ble oppdaget i 16 flisprøver. Siden overvåkingen av furuvednematode startet i 2000, har alle de analyserte flisprøvene, totalt 8924, vært negative for furuvednematode. I OK-programmets delaktivitet som omfattet kartlegging av furuvednematode i furubukker, ble feller med attraktanter for fangst av voksne, flygende furubukker satt opp i Agder, Telemark, Viken (Østfold og Akershus), Hedmark og Trøndelag. Billene ble kuttet i biter og ekstrahert med en modifisert Baermann-trakt. Suspensjonen fra ekstraksjonene ble undersøkt i mikroskop for forekomst av Bursaphelenchus spp. Ingen furuvednematoder ble påvist i de 54 undersøkte billene. Bursaphelenchus mucronatus kolymensis ble ikke heller oppdaget.

2022

Til dokument

Sammendrag

The process of creating terrain and landscape models is important in a variety of computer graphics and visualization applications, from films and computer games, via flight simulators and landscape planning, to scientific visualization and subsurface modelling. Interestingly, the modelling techniques used in this large range of application areas have started to merge in the last years. This chapter is a report where we present two taxonomies of different modelling methods. Firstly we present a data oriented taxonomy, where we divide modelling into three different scenarios: the data-free, the sparse-data and the dense-data scenario. Then we present a workflow oriented taxonomy, where we divide modelling into the separate stages necessary for creating a geological model. We start the report by showing that the new trends in geological modelling are approaching the modelling methods that have been developed in computer graphics. We then introduce the process of geological modelling followed by our two taxonomies with descriptions and comparisons of selected methods. Finally, we discuss the challenges and trends in geological modelling.

Sammendrag

When you care about data integrity of spatial data you need to know about the limitations/weaknesses of using simple feature datatype in your database. For instance https://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover/clc2018 contains 2,377,772 simple features among which we find 852 overlaps and 1420 invalid polygons. For this test I used “ESRI FGDB” file and gdal for import to postgis. We find such minor overlaps and gaps quite often, which might not be visible for the human eye. The problem here is that it covers up for real errors and makes difficult to enforce database integrity constraints for this. Close parallel lines also seems to cause Topology Exception in many spatial libraries. A core problem with simple features is that they don't contain information about the relation they have with neighbor features, so integrity of such relations is hard to constraint. Another problem is mixing of old and new data in the payload from the client. This makes it hard and expensive to create clients, because you will need a full stack of spatial libraries and maybe a complete locked exact snapshot of your database on the client side. Another thing is that a common line may differ from client to client depending on spatial lib, snapTo usage, tolerance values and transport formats. In 2022 many system are depending on live updates also for spatial data. So it’s big advantage to be able to provide a simple and “secure” API’s with fast server side integrity constraints checks that can be used from a standard web browser. When we have this checks on server side we will secure the equal rules across different clients. Is there alternatives that can secure data integrity in a better way? Yes, for instance Postgis Topology. The big difference is that Postgis Topology has more open structure that is realized by using standard database relational features. This lower the complexity of the client and secures data integrity. In the talk “Use Postgis Topology to secure data integrity, simple API and clean up messy simple feature datasets.” we will dive more into the details off Postgis Topology Building an API for clients may be possible using simple features, but it would require expensive computations to ensure topological integrity but to solve problem with mixing of new and old borders parts can not be solved without breaking the polygon up into logical parts. Another thing is attribute handling, like if you place surface partly overlapping with another surface should that have an influence on the attributes on the new surface. We need to focus more on data integrity and the complexity and cost of creating clients when using simple feature, because the demands for spatial data updated in real time from many different clients in a secure and consistent way will increase. This will be main focus in this talk. https://www.slideshare.net/laopsahl/dataintegrityriskswhenusingsimplefeaturepdf