<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">“It is a mystery to me why this scheme is not the standard model for specimen databases where there is a habit of creating chains of derivatives over time. There certainly are implementation details that need careful consideration (for
example with propagation of data down the chain, how "locked" that propagation is, and how to handle things that get completely subdivided so they no longer exist as such, but whose data must persist), but it seems like a very clean, very flexible base model.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I agree that the model described above is a desirable one, but there is no mystery, as far as I can tell as to why it isn’t standard. Excepting the output of early workers, most natural history
scientists have been highly-specialized, studying one class of organisms only. Fishes, Birds, reptiles, molluscs, etc…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">This, at least to me, is why modern museum collections are taxonomically segregated – they are arranged in a manner that best fits the historical need of their clientele. (Division of Fishes,
Division of Reptiles and Amphibians, Division of Birds, and so forth).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Database software like Specify and its associated web portal, which controls for data typing across collections, is in fact a potential partial remedy, and as an aside, the best enhancement
to my ability to manage a large collection in some 18 years on the job. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The model described above is clearly desirable for a subset of materials (e.g., Fishes and their copepod parasites, a snake and its piscine prey – my vertebrate bias is showing), but it runs
afoul of historical arrangements and tasking that are in many cases quite inflexible. I favor such cross-collection data linkages, but they will require resources and coordination beyond what most Natural History collections currently enjoy.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Kudos to this group for having the discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Best wishes,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Rob Robins<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Robert H. Robins<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Senior Biologist/Collection Manager<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Division of Ichthyology
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Florida Museum of Natural History<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">1659 Museum Road<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">PO Box 117800<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Gainesville, FL 32611-7800<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Office: (352) 273-1957<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Fax: (352) 846-0287<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:rhrobins@flmnh.ufl.edu">rhrobins@flmnh.ufl.edu</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a href="http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/">www.flmnh.ufl.edu</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> nhcoll-l-bounces@mailman.yale.edu [mailto:nhcoll-l-bounces@mailman.yale.edu]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dean Pentcheff<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, August 13, 2014 9:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Colin Favret<br>
<b>Cc:</b> nhcoll-l@mailman.yale.edu<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Nhcoll-l] Unique IDs for museum objects versus specimens<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is an issue that I've raised in the past with the Specify team (and plan to raise again in the near future — fair warning, guys :)<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The precipitating example for us comes from marine specimens. Often an unsorted jar of material will arrive (e.g. from a dredge sample) to be cataloged in the collection — this unsorted lot should get a unique ID — it may be around for
years before it's touched. Then we may pull out (for example) all the crustacea into another jar. This partly-sorted lot also needs a unique ID (it may go to a different room under different staff, so just keeping it with the original jar is not an option).
Then we may pull out a single individual, identify it, and use that in a publication, so that, too, needs an ID. A visiting researcher then examines that individual and pulls off parasitic crustacea, identifying each and putting them into individual vials,
each of which needs an ID. Etc.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What we have is a clear hierarchical branching parent-child relationship from the initial unsorted lot down to the individual parasites (and their parasites, and their molecular derivatives, etc.). Logically, the way to accommodate this
is to have any "thing" in the collection identified with a unique ID. Any derived or subsorted "thing" gets another unique ID and (and this is critical) is linked to its parent so that all the information from the parent (and on up the chain to the top) is
immediately available via any "child" ID. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Every "thing" gets a first-class ID (no sub-IDs or a limited list of "preps" from an initial object). Key to the concept is retaining the parent-child-grandchild-... chain. At any moment, one should be able to retrieve any ID's entire chain
of parents (and their associated data), or any ID's entire chain of derived children (and their associated data). <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is a mystery to me why this scheme is not the standard model for specimen databases where there is a habit of creating chains of derivatives over time. There certainly are implementation details that need careful consideration (for
example with propagation of data down the chain, how "locked" that propagation is, and how to handle things that get completely subdivided so they no longer exist as such, but whose data must persist), but it seems like a very clean, very flexible base model.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Dean<br>
-- <br>
Dean Pentcheff<br>
<a href="mailto:pentcheff@gmail.com">pentcheff@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="mailto:dpentche@nhm.org">dpentche@nhm.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Colin Favret <<a href="mailto:ColinFavret@aphidnet.org" target="_blank">ColinFavret@aphidnet.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Has anyone dealt with the distinction between issuing unique IDs (for labels and database records) for museum objects versus specimens? A case in point might be a microscope slide with 100
specimens on it (or a jar, envelope, etc.). These specimens can be of multiple taxa, different sexes, life stages, etc. I believe most collections label the museum object (slide, jar, envelope, etc.) with a unique identifier and then treat the specimens as
a lot, but this doesn't fully parse out the data associated with the various specimens in a specimen database.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">I've developed my own solution (unique ID label for the object, decimal numbers but no label for the individual specimens or specimen lots - e.g. INST123456 for the slide, INST123456.001
for the first specimen lot, INST123456.002 for the second, etc.).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">But I'm wondering what others have done or if there is anything out there approaching an industry standard.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Thanks for your input!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"">Colin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#888888"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#888888">Colin Favret</span><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#888888"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#888888">Université de Montréal</span><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#888888"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#888888"><a href="http://favret.aphidnet.org/" target="_blank">Favret.AphidNet.org</a></span><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#888888"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Nhcoll-l mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Nhcoll-l@mailman.yale.edu">Nhcoll-l@mailman.yale.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l" target="_blank">http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
NHCOLL-L is brought to you by the Society for the Preservation of<br>
Natural History Collections (SPNHC), an international society whose<br>
mission is to improve the preservation, conservation and management of<br>
natural history collections to ensure their continuing value to<br>
society. See <a href="http://www.spnhc.org" target="_blank">http://www.spnhc.org</a> for membership information.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>