Epiphyte Surveys Break Down at the Forophyte Level
The data quality problem in epiphyte surveys is almost always the same: imprecise host tree identification and inconsistent vertical stratum attribution. The first pushes morphospecies records into a context vacuum — you know what was on the tree, you don't reliably know what tree it was on. The second makes cross-site comparison meaningless because "upper third" means different things to different field technicians operating under different canopy heights.
The Río Cesar Vasculares template resolves both problems structurally. Every epiphyte record is attached to a forophyte record — a specific, measured, photographed, GPS-anchored host tree with a CAP and HT reading. The vertical stratification is captured in three discrete integer fields, not a prose description. That's the architecture that produces data that can actually be analyzed.
What the Forophyte Record Anchors
The forophyte section carries the full biometric context for each host tree: ID, GPS waypoint code, common name (Nombre Común del Forofito), CAP (circunferencia a la altura del pecho), and total height in meters. The photograph field documents the crown form and bark character. This is not bureaucratic excess — epiphyte distribution is strongly correlated with host tree characteristics. CAP predicts bark surface area. HT predicts the vertical range over which epiphytes can establish. A host tree record without these dimensions is an incomplete ecological unit.
The Tipo de Muestreo field — Forofito, Subparcela, Recorrido Libre — distinguishes the sampling method applied at each collection event. This is critical for analysis because detection probability differs substantially across methods. Forofito-based sampling is exhaustive within the canopy of a selected host. Subparcela sampling covers a defined ground area. Recorrido Libre is opportunistic. Treating all three as equivalent in a species accumulation analysis would be methodologically wrong, and the field ensures they're never treated that way.
Cod Parcela links the individual tree record to its plot unit within the site's sampling grid — connecting the Memento database to the broader plot-level data structure that governs the survey design.
Stratification as Structured Data
Estrato 1, Estrato 2, and Estrato 3 are integer fields — presence/absence or abundance scores per stratum, collected consistently across every sampling event. In Río Cesar dry forest gallery vegetation, where canopy height, humidity gradient, and light penetration shift dramatically between strata, the vertical distribution of epiphytic orchids, aroids, and bromeliads carries real biological signal.
A morphospecies found exclusively in Estrato 3 (upper canopy) is encountering a very different microclimate than one concentrated in Estrato 1 (sub-canopy/trunk zone). When this information is structured in queryable fields rather than embedded in observation notes, you can generate stratum-by-morphospecies distribution matrices directly from the database at the end of a field campaign.
The morphospecies field — Morfoespecie (Epifita-ID Campo) — captures the field identification code assigned before laboratory confirmation. This is the honest intermediate step that most survey databases skip or handle poorly. The field photograph paired with the morphospecies code is the specimen record that the post-campaign identification work operates from.
The Coordenada location field pins each forophyte to a GPS point. In a riparian corridor survey where the vegetation composition shifts with distance from the water channel and with changes in flooding regime, geographic clustering of records within the database is how you begin to see the environmental gradients that determine epiphyte community structure.