In 08.54 26/11/2002 +0000, hai scritto:
>>GEM=precise data (locality and habitat) and very reliable (personally
>>collected or from source which can be trusted)
>>F+=as GEM, but may lack some details on habitat, very reliable
>>F=as F+, but source, despite deserves trust, has not been checked
>>Good=Usually only locality given, source reliabilty not checked
>>Poor=data may be limited to country of origin, if more information is
>>provided source is not supposed to be reliable
>>
>>GEM does not mean I know water salinity and temperature, but that standard
>>habitat data are available such as depth, bottom, associations with any
>>other sea life if present.
>
Ciao Paolo,
My humble opinion is that you could go to make confusion with the grading
of the dealers who usually determine the shells with the same method.
You could have a found shells for example with growth marks or defects but
precise (obviously) data, thus you grade with GEM, but when you exchange it
with a guy, he thinks that your shell is perfect.....
If I remember well this grading is created by "Hawaiian Malacological
Society,
International Shell Grading Standard by Leehman and Lillico"
Personally I should put the grade and betweens brackets a number of that
indicate how is precise the data locality for example
GEM(1),,,F+(4) and so on...I think that 5 grades could be enough
Hope this helps!
.~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^.
FLAVIO FAVERO
Via G.B.Aleotti 4
44100 Ferrara  - ITALY

EMAILS  [log in to unmask]
                [log in to unmask]
ICQ UIN  : 5638595 (Nick: Flypers)
WEB PAGE : http://www.geocities.com/flypers5/
.~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^.
Stay away from the darker side, and if you start to go astray let the force be
your guide