Made changes to the datacard

README.md

@@ -174,9 +174,12 @@ Processing steps included:
 
 ### Curation Rationale
 
-[More Information Needed]
+This dataset was curated for training a model to classify different species of Heliconius Butterflies and to take into account mimicry between species and acuity of the observer (bird, butterfly, or human/other).
+The original data (Cuthill et al 2019) had misclassified species/subspecies and some locality/ collection sites were outside the known range of the butterflies. 
+It also contained hybrid and aberrant samples, that had the potential to muddle classification results. 
+To prevent this, the data was further refined by several Heliconius experts to remove hybrid and aberrant samples. 
+Lastly, bird and butterfly acuities were added to provide another level of analysis.
 
-The original data has some misclassified species/subspecies and some localities were outside the known range of the butterflies. Furthermore, the bird and butterfly acuities were not part of the original dataset and provide another level of analysis.
 
 ### Source Data
 
@@ -195,11 +198,15 @@ Photographers: Robyn Crowther and Sophie Ledger, Natural History Museum, London.
 
 #### Annotation process
 
-[More Information Needed]
+The original data has some misclassified species/subspecies, and had multiple hybrid samples. These samples were removed by hand by OM, CL, JM, KK. 
+Some localities were outside the known range of the butterflies, and were removed using QGIS and known sub species ranges. 
 
 #### Who are the annotators?
 
-[More Information Needed]
+Christopher Lawrence 
+Jim Mallet
+Owen McMilan
+Krystof Kozak
 
 ### Personal and Sensitive Information
 
@@ -209,11 +216,11 @@ None
 
 ### Social Impact of Dataset
 
-[More Information Needed]
+N/A
 
 ### Discussion of Biases
 
-[More Information Needed]
+Biased towards species and subspecies within Heliconius. Focused on Heliconius erato and Heliconius melpomene 
 
 ### Other Known Limitations