In my opinion it is also very important to include coordinates on the shell
labels for plotting grit maps of the distribution of the species and
secondly for the future (locality names often changes).

***********************************************
Henk H. Dijkstra (Hon. Res. Ass.)
c/o Zoological Museum, Dept. Malacology, University of Amsterdam
PO Box 94766, 1090 GT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
-----------------------------
Private address:
Gravinneweg 12, 8604 CA Sneek, The Netherlands
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
***********************************************


> Van: Andrew Grebneff <[log in to unmask]>
> Beantwoord: Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
> Datum: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:44:31 +1300
> Aan: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Re: basic data blues - fossils
>
>> Concerning recent shells I have clearly in mind the importance of giving
>> time details in the shell labels (I usually write even the day if I know it).
>> But when it comes to fossils, the exact time of collecting seems less
>> important and can give information more on when a site was accessible than
>> on the specimens themselves.
>
> Surely it is important. It telss folk when the fossil was collected.
> Specimens have a history, especially when they eventually (hopefully)
> make their way into an institutional collection.
>
>> Apart the fact that I think on shell (recent & fossil) labels the valid
>> rule is always "the more the better",  what the accuracy to be given to
>> labels in this case?
>> For example: when searching a single site for few times in a year or a few
>> years, does it have any sense to attach to any shell its correct day of
>> collecting?
>
> Yes.
>
>> May it be enough to just cite the period you used to go to
>> that spot?
>
> Not in my opinion!
>
>> I've been following this discussion and got the idea that it might be
>> usefull to create a grading system for the shell data as we have it
>> for the shells
>> themselves.
>
> The HSN grading system unfortunately is nonsense. Since when does
> good mean "not good"? Etc...
>
>> By that way traders could give easily information about the
>> quality of the data without adding it completely to their lists -
>> which i think
>> would save them a lot of work.
>
> Not a bad idea, but I very much doubt it would end up being objective.
>
>> I myself never
>> thought about including for example water temperature or the weather
>> conditions
>> during collecting but now somebody mentioned it i find it a useful
>> information.
>
> In the vast majority of cases temperature and weather conditions will
> be meaningless excess. Likewise wind speed and direction, wave height
> etc. Not relevant, as the shore-dwelling molluscs are stuck there
> whatever the conditions change to. For PELAGIC or swimming species
> such data can be useful, however.
> --
> Andrew Grebneff
> 165 Evans St, Dunedin 9001, New Zealand
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Seashell, Macintosh, VW/Toyota van nut
>
> ================================================================
> Deze e-mail is door E-mail VirusScanner van Planet Internet gecontroleerd op
> virussen.
> Op http://www.planet.nl/evs staat een verwijzing naar de actuele lijst waar op
> wordt gecontroleerd.