Collection Sheet Archive/SMP (was Re: Common fish naming)

Andrew.Boyd at dfat.gov.au
Thu, 14 Nov 96 04:07:35 EST

Cary in answer to Alan Salmon at 13/11/96 12:36 PM wrote:

>I think the main point is identification. If the ANGFA sheets are
>filled out and copies are stored at a central site, then we just need
>to identify which collection is which. It would be nice to have all
>the info in the name, but it could also get cumbersome. If its too
>complex, I think we would have a hard time keeping the identifier
>with the fishes name. I also think the initials part encourages the
>collector to use the identifier for vanities sake. Also year of
>collection could be important if some watersheds are merged by a
>temporary flood or other translocation of species.
>The exact location is important, but I think it would also be good
>to encourage turning in of collection data sheets with as much
>information as possible.
>I guess this is what I see as an attraction to the killie folks
>method. I'm not sure if they actually require a collection sheet be
>turned in, but I think its something that should be requested if not
>required.

Cary: I have a few thoughts on the above...

1. Like I said before I'm happy to donate what resources I have to
maintaining either part or whole of the "central collection sheet
archive" if such a beast is to be on the WWW, or the WWW side of a
dead tree (paper) archive; this involves both marking the material up
and maintaining it on the site.

2. I'd like to see it cross-referenced to a register of maintained
species: I am again happy to volunteer what help I can.

I feel that both these resources would help when we do get around to
organising Species Maintenance Programs. A fish could then be said
(but I admit there is a lot of leeway for real life to come into play
here in the form of mistakes/deception) to be of a particular strain,
be they identified as "Pseudomugil (Poppondetta) furcata (Tappin
strain)" or "Melanotaenia trifasciata Coen River (3/93 collection)".
When we have the strain identified, isolated if you will, then it can
be verified by being run through the blender. I think that it is
bigger than collection site alone.

Regards, Andrew Boyd