I’m wondering if there is a way to track different determinations over time. For example, one person identifies an animal to genus and then years later someone identifies it to species. I know you can add multiple determinations to a single specimen, but this method is confusing because when items are queried it implies there are multiple specimens or that catalog numbers have been duplicated. Is there a way to track determinations in a table in the form?
Good morning @fergashl,
Using the determinations table, which as you note has a many-to-one relationship with a collection object is the usual way to track multiple determinations over time. Using the isCurrent and determinedDateare used to create a picture of when determinations were made chronologically, and which one represents the most “correct” or “current” determination.
When querying a record with multiple determinations, using Collection Object as the base table, the (aggregated) option can be selected in the determination table to display all determinations in a single row for a particular catalog number, along with a (current) displayed beside the determination of that list that is most current. For example, something like the below.
Query:
Catalog Number → Any
Determinations → Aggregated
Result:
| Catalog Number | Determinations |
|---|---|
| 0123456 | Vulpes vulpes (current), Turdus migratorius |
Would this help? Without the aggregated option being selected, you are correct there will be multiple rows with the same catalog number.
1 Like
That helps a lot, thank you!
Hi @markp ,
I am wondering what you do in the case of ‘multiple current’ determinations? In our herbarium specimens, we something have material that was thought to be 1 species at the time of collection, but later was found to be two (or more). So then we have 1 sheet, with 2 dets that are current? We don’t usually have the resources to physically curate/separate them, so are trying to find the best way to represent the information in Specify.
Thanks for any insights!
Heather
This is a very interesting question! Up until today, I would have just said that there shouldn’t be anything that would prevent two (or more) determinations from being current simultaneously. However, in testing my answer to your question, I found this little function, which in practice will mean that you cannot check current on more than one determination:
Additionally, this has some interesting behaviour in the new bulk edit tool. If you try to commit a Collection Object with more than one determination marked as current, this won’t apply current=Yes to both, however, you won’t get any errors.
That business rule wasn’t something that I was aware of previously, so I need to think through your question for our users as well, as they will want to do the same thing.
There was a topic on this last year Specify Botany Webinar: Multiple Specimens on a Sheet, perhaps this might be helpful? One approach to having multi-species collection objects is to figure out how to implement multiple determinations, but another would be to catalogue the truly different specimens as separate collection objects mounted on the same sheet.
*edit: this also brings up something else I’ve been really wanting in specify… an automated way to split and merge lots. Currently, if you find a lot that has more than one species, it’s quite hard to represent the relationship between the original lot and the new one without a lot of manual explanation. It would significantly speed up the process of dealing with stuff like this if there were a plugin/script that could auto-add in the correct relationships and stock text of a collection’s choosing when splitting or merging CO records, especially those that are in the same COG or container.
1 Like
Happy for any insights you have! I am looking into the option of perhaps editing something to allow for more than one det. to be marked ‘current’, but I believe this little field does a lot of heavy lifting for exports and such. In my use-case, I would be ‘happy’ for each det. marked as current to be included in exports, but I can see that changing the function of that particular field may have broader consequences.
The only data management alternatives I can see are either just leaving all subsequent “co-current” dets. unchecked, or looking at managing catalog numbers; having to have additional record entries to be able to capture it (if you want each actual current det. to be checked as ‘current’). Which I don’t love, because it can confound your ‘count’ for specimens. It also then gets mixed into effective ways of managing relationships. If I send one specimen out for loan, and another (digital) record goes along, then documenting that is tricky too.
really appreciate your quick reply, in some ways, I am glad that there aren’t easy/quick solutions, or else I would be sad I hadn’t figured them out sooner!
cheers,
Heather
(unfortunately we are still in S6, hoping S7 is in sight, but lots of data to import in the meantime)
YES, I saw your reply after writing mine.
You capture the challenges exactly! There were ‘containers’ at some point, where you could ‘put 2 specimens in the same container’ (bucket?), but the last time i looked into them (many years ago), they required a ‘label’ for the container, and that it didn’t inform the transaction tools. So even if you went to the trouble of putting them in a container, sending 1 on loan, didn’t flag another specimen on the same sheet (but I also could have not fully understood them).
The trade-off of multiple digital records for one sheet for being able to have multiple dets identified as current is not clear to me. May vary by collection and the resources/expertise available…
H
In general, if we have more than 1 collection “Event” on a sheet (more than 1 date and/or location), then we would assign an additional catalog number. But for the ‘same’ event, with later ‘split’ dets, we are still trying to figure out the best way to tell that ‘story’ in Specify.
I think your use case here would work pretty well with the new collection object group feature, though I haven’t used it myself. That would however require you to have separate collection object records, as you noted.
Just from a collections management standpoint, I don’t see any reason why cataloguing different species as different collection object records, regardless of whether they’re from the same col. event or a different col events would be confusing or undesirable. I think many collection users and biodiversity aggregator data endusers expect one record to be 1 species collected at a single place and time. edit: even in herbaria and entomology collections where sometimes there are records for individual specimens, the relationship tends not to go the other way (multiple specimens for one record), at least in my experience!
In most collections, if a lot is “mixed” the determinations or remarks will say so. But I think introducing a formal way to indicate a lot is mixed is a more confusing solution than making it easier to assign unique identifiers to unique objects that need to be tracked.
I will definitely look into the new ‘object group’ feature, with the new ‘geology’ schema coming along, I wondered if that might also influence options for managing relationships. I think there are a lot of different ways to manage ‘mixed’ objects, with different implications. For example, if you had a lot of herbarium sheets that were mixed, and each (single) physical sheet was represented by multiple digital records, then when you are managing the physical objects and ‘space’ you would have to know your digital count doesn’t represent the physical one. On the flip side, physically separating material is time consuming, and perhaps increases pressure on limited storage spaces.
Really we just need a field that lets you identify a relationship like “part of” this other thing, “on same sheet as” this other thing. We currently do this in a text field, but it doesn’t inform/link to any other functions (e.g. like loans).
1 Like
I believe that the new collection object groups do make the distinction you are after, and take into consideration the physicality for things like loans.
Discrete - Two or more physical pieces from the same source in the field that are cataloged as distinct collection objects.
Consolidated - Samples or specimens comprising two or more Specify Collection Objects that in the Collection are physically joined either directly together or through a common substrate. Could be joined together naturally before collecting or could be done as a collecting or curatorial method.
A herbarium sheet is mentioned as one of the examples of a consolidated object
For interactions: