Topic 2: GUIDs for Collections and Specimens

[Roderic Page]

My point is that it isn't always done (and the MVZ example concerns
totally different specimens, rather than preparations of the same
specimen). My aim is not to criticise DiGIR and Darwin Core
specifically (although the absence of a GUID is a major weakness), but
simply to provide a concrete example where digital records for totally
different specimens are not clearly distinguished. In the MVZ example,
one could retrieve the record for the desired specimen if one searched
on the taxonomic name, but this is cumbersome -- ideally I want a GUID
that can be resolved to the appropriate specimen independent of any
other information. DiGIR can do this, so long as DiGIR providers using
different resource names for different collections.

Regards

Rod



On 20 Oct 2005, at 23:11, Dave Vieglais wrote:

> Hi Roderic,
> In general, for records retrieved from data sources exposed using the
> Darwin Core one should be able to combine InstitutionCode,
> CollectionCode and CatalogNumber to provide unique identifiers for
> those
> records.  This is not always the case however, the most common example
> of which is probably the presence of records for different preparations
> of the same specimen.
>
> regards,
>   Dave V.
>
> Roderic Page wrote:
>> As a consumer of specimen GUIDs, I've found specimens to be
>> frustrating
>> to deal with as individual collections don't guarantee uniqueness of
>> identifiers (Donald's point 2 below). For example, in the absence of
>> specimen GUIDs (such as LSIDs) I'd hoped to use a three part
>> identifier
>> based on the DiGIR provider, e.g.
>>
>> DiGIR provider URL : resource : specimen code
>>
>> Hence,
>>
>> digir.fieldmuseum.org/digir/DiGIR.php:MammalsDwC2:FMNH158106
>> \-----------------------------------/ \---------/ \--------/
>> provider resource specimen
>>
>> identifies specimen FMNH 158106 of Tatera robusta at the Field Museum
>> in
>> Chicago. The idea behind this crude hack is that the identifier can be
>> resolved (there's enough information in the identifier to retrieve the
>> record, see for example
>> http://darwin.zoology.gla.ac.uk/~rpage/hacks/2/index.html ).
>>
>> To my horror, if I do this for MVZ 148946, I get three specimens back,
>> one each for Chaetodipus baileyi baileyi, Calidris mauri, and Rana
>> cascadae. This is an instance where the same specimen code is being
>> used
>> in three different collections (mammals, birds, and herps). I guess
>> MVZ
>> could have avoided this by using a different name for the 'resource'
>> field for each collection.
>>
>> I offer this as an example of where GUIDs are vital if we are to avoid
>> linking to the wrong information, and also where individual providers
>> need to ensure that the identifiers they generate are unique.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Rod
>>
>>
>> Professor Roderic D. M. Page
>> Editor, Systematic Biology
>> DEEB, IBLS
>> Graham Kerr Building
>> University of Glasgow
>> Glasgow G12 8QP
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Phone: +44 141 330 4778
>> Fax: +44 141 330 2792
>> email: r.page at bio.gla.ac.uk
>> web: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/rod.html
>> reprints: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/pubs.html
>>
>> Subscribe to Systematic Biology through the Society of Systematic
>> Biologists Website: http://systematicbiology.org
>> Search for taxon names at
>> http://darwin.zoology.gla.ac.uk/~rpage/portal/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Professor Roderic D. M. Page
Editor, Systematic Biology
DEEB, IBLS
Graham Kerr Building
University of Glasgow
Glasgow G12 8QP
United Kingdom

Phone:    +44 141 330 4778
Fax:      +44 141 330 2792
email:    r.page at bio.gla.ac.uk
web:      http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/rod.html
reprints: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/pubs.html

Subscribe to Systematic Biology through the Society of Systematic
Biologists Website:  http://systematicbiology.org
Search for taxon names at http://darwin.zoology.gla.ac.uk/~rpage/portal/