Wait… what does that say?
Few things have caused me as much grief as problematic sample names (well, maybe the Bioanalyzer. Still mad at you, buddy). Was past-Kathryn trying to mess with me???
For my hard won thoughts on how to *not* screw yourself over in the future, by thoughtfully choosing sample names, check out my post at The Molecular Ecologist.
I had a nail. @rOpenSci had the hammer. Photo by Zorro.
The helpful folks over at rOpenSci have come up with exactly the tool I needed, exactly when I needed it.
Zipper picture from Wikimedia Commons, by Rabensteiner – Bearbeitet von Rainer Z
I found my self in a bit of a quandry. I had a data frame which contained many columns that needed to be squished together – each contained a few values, but mostly NAs, and none of the values were overlapping. They represented the same variable, but broken apart across several columns. I needed to condense several columns into one.
So finding minima is apparently a really complex problem. But all I need is a consistent, non-subjective way to determine cut-offs around a peak. This is what I came up with, perhaps useful to you?
Maps are quite useful things, if you want to convey information about where in the world something happens. But, turns out, they are harder to make than I naively thought! But not that hard.
So, long time, no talk, gentle reader. That’s because I’ve been writing a paper (my first first-authored paper, if you must know) and I feel really guilty about extraneous writing activities, like somehow I am cheating on my paper. How can I justify reading up on a tasty tuber or invasive insect and crafting its story and biology into an intriguing knowledge nugget, when mountains of data await re-analysis for the billionth time, and co-authors deserve satisfaction? How indeed?