<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/25/15 9:42 AM, Ellen Paul wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:54EE0972.5000408@verizon.net" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">However, the ICR raises other issues
of concern. If your institution has already accessioned the
materials, then how can you submit anything that indicates the
item was accessioned into a DOI collection? Will you need to
de-accession first?<br>
<br>
If you review the full proposed ICR (top document here: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.reginfo.gov_public_do_PRAViewDocument-3Fref-5Fnbr-3D201412-2D1084-2D001&d=AwMD-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=9KrnUnldcK3ZfHPvPpmPdGu2cGKPd7_h4xpOOunblX4&s=yHSYTaSWJPbmjIxmt4fC0eHMSc9k66rUrPAPEkA9qlg&e=">http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201412-1084-001</a>),
you will see that is clear that they are talking about accession
into a DOI collection, which is consistent with the claim of DOI
ownership. It would be inconsistent with that claim of ownership
by someone other than your institution to accession an item into
your own collection. You would need a DOI accession number and a
DOI accession record for each item. <br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
FYI: we recently worked with the staff at Joshua Tree National Park
on a series of "Bioblitzes" during which we collected over 1000
insect specimens, almost none of which were identifiable beyond
family level during the event(s). There were numerous exchanges
between us, where they requested the standard boilerplate kinds of
information, and talked about labeling and accession numbers and
such, before I was able to explain how those regulations don't work
for unidentified specimens of insects, whose labels are 7 x 15 mm.
They eventually agreed to ignore that the specimens are not
identified, and the compromise we worked out regarding labeling and
accessioning is this: as a matter of routine, we put a globally
unique ID number on every specimen as we label it (e.g., "UCRC ENT
314695"), and all of these records are in our database. For all of
the specimens that come from the JTNP events, they insisted on
giving us unique DOI numbers *anyway*, rather than using our GUIDs;
these DOI accession numbers are linked ONLY in the database, and
there are no printed labels added to these specimens. As specimens
from among this material are IDed, we can report back as to which
ones they are, cross-referencing the DOI numbers when doing so, in a
nice tidy spreadsheet output (e.g., UCRC ENT 314695 is also JOTR
33261, now IDed as <i>Diadasia rinconis</i> in the spreadsheet).
This allows them to get the information they want, using their
accession numbers, without interfering with our curatorial
practices. Having multiple "unique" numbers on a specimen is
certainly difficult if there are physical labels involved, and
thousands of specimens, but not so hard when in a database, so
anyone who maintains a database like this should be able to add DOI
numbers just as easily as we did.<br>
<br>
Peace,<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Doug Yanega Dept. of Entomology Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314 skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cache.ucr.edu_-7Eheraty_yanega.html&d=AwMD-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=vpuLBBSKneLssf6ZpyhpG5xAZY_ZFdLAmmAnpVU9fFQ&s=cUqEWCB1Ao07T5EJ_k2GD2Cs3i8IOa6Uk14rY1ieEkk&e=">http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html</a>
"There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82</pre>
</body>
</html>