collection numbers

Mon May 24 02:34:25 CDT 1999

>    I completely disagree with you statement:
>  Besides, one can easily solve that problem by including
>  the date in the number. Give the plant the collection
>  number "23059924" meaning it is the 24th specimen you
>  collected on 23 May 1999. Totally unambiguous, unless you
>  are in botany for over 100 years.
>     This is about the worst possible use of collection numbers.

Please reread my posting yesterday in its entirety. I
was not suggesting this as an alternative to the usual
sequential numbering system. I was suggesting this as
an alternative to no numbers at all, in the case of
a collector too lazy to use a proper notebook. I use
a sequential numbering system myself.

> Sorry to say that this way is NOT totally
> unambiguous since different parts
>  of the world tend to write the date differently.

This is irrelevant if we are talking about a single
collector. If that collector is consistent, yes,
the system is unambiguous.

May the Ficus be with you!

Joe Skywalker

Dr. Joseph E. Laferriere

More information about the Taxacom mailing list