Print

Print


Hi Nico,

Canadensys publishes specimen datasets from individual researchers that are
tagged with a DOI and pushed on to GBIF. For example, Marla Schwarzfeld has
a dataset <http://doi.org/10.5886/y2bbsq5> that includes specimens from
multiple institutions tagged with a variety of unique identifiers,
including her own.

Cheer, Colin

Colin Favret
​, ​
Université de Montréal
​
<http://favret.aphidnet.org/>


On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 1:35 AM, Nico Franz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Thank you, all.
>
>    Sorry I dropped the ball there for a few days. I received several
> interesting off-line answers in addition.
>
>    I think I should also try to clarify. First off, for the (some)
> botanists - in entomology there is much less of a tradition of "creating
> duplicates" (of purportedly the same individual..thinking about branches of
> an oak tree here). Insect specimens overwhelmingly remain and travel
> "entire" (even following dissection). I hope that distinction is fair
> enough to most.
>
>    Here is the conflict, as simple as I can state it. There is an
> institution that the specimens ultimately belong to, and that loans them
> out to a researcher. Then there is a researcher, not affiliated with the
> institution, who right now has resources and arguably needs to "publish"
> the specimens via iDigBio, GBIF, etc. (as well as other outlets such as a
> research journal).
>
>    Let's assume that the owning institution just really does not have the
> resources right now. Not even to put a locally unique specimen identifier
> on it (or, it does that, but there is no digital counterpart). And the
> researcher does. Beyond writing a kind, explanatory e-mail, and figuring
> things out (idiosyncratically), is there some more widespread accepted
> practice for resolving this conflict? Answering "I use this or that portal
> that I happen to have access to and which does it for me", is not really a
> generally applicable answer, right?
>
>    If not, should we as a community (in our most hopeful moments, anyway)
> consider creating one or more that are very open for contributions?
> Something like an open portal for digitizing and iDigBio-/GBIF-publishing
> research-relevant specimens of/for owner institutions that "just can't
> right now, sorry".
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nico
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Gil Nelson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Nico
>>
>> I am not exactly sure what you are looking for, but here is a link to a
>> set of community generated workflows for several disciplines.
>>
>> https://www.idigbio.org/content/workflow-modules-and-task-lists
>>
>> Are you looking for entomology workflows? If so, what groups in
>> particular? Katja Seltmann would also be a good resource for this.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Gil
>>
>>
>> On 9/5/2016 1:56 PM, Nico Franz wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all:
>>>
>>>    Is there a good reference (publication) I'm not aware of that guides
>>> one towards best practices for digitizing and iDigBio-/GBIF-publishing
>>> specimens from another source collection which has not yet done so, for the
>>> purpose of a revisionary project?
>>>
>>> Best, Nico
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Gil Nelson, PhD
>> Assistant Professor/Research
>> iDigBio Steering Committee
>> Integrated Digitized Biocollections
>> Institute for Digital Information and Scientific Communication
>> College of Communication and Information
>>
>> Courtesy Professor
>> Department of Biological Sciences
>> Robert K. Godfrey Herbarium
>> Florida State University
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>