# Interpreting the nutrient database

**URL:** <https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/t/interpreting-the-nutrient-database/1859>\
**Category:** Software Support\
**Tags:** ndr\
**Created:** [April 26, 2021, 7:51am UTC](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/t/interpreting-the-nutrient-database/1859 "2021-04-26T07:51:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![michelle.vanhilten](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@michelle.vanhilten](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/u/michelle.vanhilten)\
**Post date:** [April 26, 2021, 7:51am UTC](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/t/interpreting-the-nutrient-database/1859/1 "2021-04-26T07:51:54Z")

</div>

Hi there,  
I am using some of the values found in the provided nutrient database excel sheet in the user manual for the NDR module for my research. For the maximum retention efficiency for each LULC class, the nutrient database refers to a column ‘eff\_n’ with values between 0 and 100. Do these directly correlate to floating point values? For example, forest eff\_n is listed as 89 in the nutrient database, thus would the eff\_n be 0.89? Or do these values need to be converted to floating point values in another way?  
Thanks in advance for any insight.  
Kind regards,  
Michelle van Hilten

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swolny](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex031/user_avatar/community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/swolny/32/181_2.png) [@swolny](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/u/swolny)\
**Post date:** [April 26, 2021, 3:36pm UTC](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/t/interpreting-the-nutrient-database/1859/2 "2021-04-26T15:36:48Z")

</div>

Hi @michelle.vanhilten -

Yes, you’re correct that a value of 89 would be entered as 0.89 in the biophysical table for NDR. If I recall correctly, there’s a mismatch between what’s given in the database and what’s required by the model because the database was put together a while ago when older versions of NDR required that eff\_n be given as 89, but more recent versions of the model require 0.89.

~ Stacie

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![michelle.vanhilten](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@michelle.vanhilten](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/u/michelle.vanhilten)\
**Post date:** [April 27, 2021, 10:19am UTC](https://community.naturalcapitalalliance.org/t/interpreting-the-nutrient-database/1859/3 "2021-04-27T10:19:03Z")

</div>

That’s great, thank you for the prompt response Stacie!