Dear all,
I read with interest the discussion on stratigraphy. When we implemented our latest version of our database in Emu we used the following standards:
Each stratigraphical occurrence was alligned with the Gradstein and Ogg timescale, ie Chrostratigraphy only.
Sometimes interpretation is hard but we used the following site which helps greatly interpreting any local variations:
http://www.stratigraphy.org/bak/geowhen/geolist.html
Our CMS has the ability to record both this interpretation, who made it and when.
We also have the ability to record verbatim the original stratigraphical data as we find that labels, particularly collections donated some time ago, rarely confirm to current standards.
We initially investigated loading currently accepted local classifications but in reality there are too many of them and disagreements over classifications. Updating them would also be difficult as and when new
studies are published, whereas updating our chronostratigraphic chart is easy when a new stage is agreed internationally.
We have a field so we can record any published litho or biostratigraphic schemes that may have been used to interpret or record stratigraphical details of our specimens.
Hope this helps. All the best,
Giles
From: cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com [mailto:cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com]
On Behalf Of Kröger, Björn
Sent: 15 October 2019 09:26
To: cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com
Subject: Re: [CETAF_ESG] Advice need: about how earth science collections defined stratigraphically in institutions.
Hi,
I will give a talk about the stratigraphy problem @ Biodiversity_Next in Leiden next week (https://tinyurl.com/y4mfkxv9).
See also here:
https://palaeo-electronica.org/content/2017/1801-rnames-db
May be in Leiden there will be a chance to discuss how to proceed with this approach.
Kind regards,
Björn
From: <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com> on behalf of Patricia Mergen <patricia.mergen@plantentuinmeise.be>
Reply-To: "cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com" <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com>
Date: Tuesday, 15 October 2019 at 10:10
To: "cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com" <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com>
Subject: Re: [CETAF_ESG] Advice need: about how earth science collections defined stratigraphically in institutions.
I agree there are the current accepted standards, classifications to be used, but due to local logistic constraints the collections might be kept still in former systems, or best practices agreed upon largely but not necessarily the standard.
Ideally a portal would indeed offer multiple classifications search and if feasible automatic correspondence between them so to support the users as indeed quite some work to keep up locally with it.
We have similar challenges with biology collections so certainly a technical issue we can work together on...
All the best
Pat
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019, 08:41 Schmitt, Ralf Thomas, <Ralf-Thomas.Schmitt@mfn.berlin> wrote:
Dear Laura,
I think also a standard for chronotratigraphy is necessary and the ics timescale is therefore the best solution.
Nevertheless, collection specimens are in most cases sorted based on “old” local stratigraphic names, e.g. Kupferschiefer, Rotliegendes, Quaderkalk, Muschelkalk, Bleiglanzbank. Also inquiries used in most cases these names, e.g. search for silver sample in the Kupferschiefer, agate geode from the Rotliegendes of Thüringer Wald, celestine from the Muschelkalk.
For me it is generally hard to place this “old” local stratigraphic names within these ics timescale, this takes a lot of knowledge and time.
Generally, for portals good solutions must be developed that allows searching based on various different timescales and also common local stratigraphic names.
Best regards,
Ralf
Von: cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com> Im Auftrag von Eder, Johanna
Gesendet: Dienstag, 15. Oktober 2019 07:51
An: cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com
Betreff: Re: [CETAF_ESG] Advice need: about how earth science collections defined stratigraphically in institutions.
Dear Laura,
I fully agree with Björn and Steffen. This is the only choice to apply this standard.
Best wishes
Johanna
Am Mo., 14. Okt. 2019 um 16:24 Uhr schrieb Kröger, Björn <bjorn.kroger@helsinki.fi>:
Hello Laura,
I am not 100% sure what for these categories are needed and why there is some constraint for the number of categories. But properly defined global chronostratigraphic units are the only choice and I would also go for a hierarchical solution with codes for e.g. the Mesozoic unspecified and then lower in the hierarchy toward the periods. The latest international standard can be found here: http://stratigraphy.org/index.php/ics-chart-timescale
Kind regards,
Björn
From: <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com> on behalf of "laura.tilley@cetaf.org" <laura.tilley@cetaf.org>
Reply-To: "cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com" <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com>
Date: Monday, 14 October 2019 at 17:10
To: ESG <cetaf_earthsc@cetaf.simplelists.com>
Subject: [CETAF_ESG] Advice need: about how earth science collections defined stratigraphically in institutions.
Dear colleagues,
I am writing to ask for some advice on how I should define the stratigraphic levels for the SYNTHESYS+ Collections Digitisation Dashboard.. I have attached an excel sheet with classification of Stratigraphy from the ICEDIG project (sheet 1 in black ink) – I have added some categories in red – but I think there are too many to be filled in. Could Precambrian material be lumped together?
I would like to ask do we need that many categories really? – based on how earth science collections are categorised in institutions.
Do you have any insight into how Earth Science collections are classified?
I need to add a category for unknown.
In sheet two, CSIC Madrid has given an alternative classification.
I would be grateful for any feedback before the end of this week.
Best wishes
Laura
Dr. Laura Tilley
Project Assistant
CETAF, AISBL
+32 (0) 2 627 42 50
CONSORTIUM OF EUROPEAN TAXONOMIC FACILITIES
c/o Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
rue Vautier, 29 1000, Brussels. Belgium
Exploring and documenting diversity in nature
Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail message it is privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. Any unauthorized use, printing, copying, disclosure or dissemination of this communication may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please reply to the sender and delete this message from your computer.
Be green, read on screen!
To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://archives.simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://archives.simplelists.com
--
__________________________
Prof. Dr. Johanna Eder
DirektorinStaatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart
Rosenstein 1, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
T +49 (0) 711 89 36 - 115
F +49 (0) 711 89 36 - 100
www.naturkundemuseum-bw.de
__________________________________
Sonderausstellung „RIESIG im Meer“
ab 24.10.2019 – 14.6.2020 | Schloss Rosenstein
_________________________________
Bleiben Sie mit uns in Kontakt: Science Blog Facebook Twitter Instagram
Unterstützen Sie das Museum und werden Sie Mitglied im Förderverein!
Informationen zur Verarbeitung personenbezogener Daten nach der DSGVO durch das SMNS finden Sie hier.
To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://archives.simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://archives.simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=ZSkFO3TNhj6e4JL4w4PrU7M47gj8uiOA