Dear Specify community,
We are currently designing the structure of our Zoology collections in Specify and would appreciate advice from institutions with similar situations. Our museum has many historical collections that are still active and curatorially maintained, but some of them span multiple taxonomic groups. For example, bird specimens can be found in:
-Bird collection
-Bird egg collection
-Skeleton collection (contains specimens of vertebrata)
-Exotic vertebrata collection (also contains specimens of vertebrata)
At the same time we must introduce a single museum-wide unique identifier (CNHM number) for all specimens. We are considering two approaches:
Option 1 – “Digital collection” approach
Create unified digital collections for taxonomic groups (e.g. Birds). These would include specimens from several historical collections.
Each record would have:
-CNHM number (museum-wide identifier)
-a digital Bird collection catalog number
-the original historical catalog number (stored as AltCatalogNumber)
Option 2 – Taxonomic collections with historical attributes
Keep taxonomic collections (Birds, Mammals, etc.), use the CNHM number as the Catalog Number, store the original historical inventory number in AltCatalogNumber, and record the historical collection in a custom field.
In both cases the historical collections would still exist curatorially, but digitally they would be grouped under taxonomic or organisational collections.
From your experience with Specify implementations which approach is generally recommended?
Is it best practice to use the museum-wide identifier as the Catalog Number, while storing historical inventory numbers in AltCatalogNumber?
We would especially appreciate hearing how other museums handle historical collections that contain specimens belonging to several taxonomic collections.
Thank you very much for your advice.
Irena Grbac
Croatian Natural History Museum