Location vs. habitat and description

• by Nye

  How do you decide which information belongs in which field? The specimen I'm looking at now says "Near Woodlawn, edge of swamps and streams. Said to be generally distributed in the county." Is "Near Woodlawn" the location and the rest the habitat? Or is it all habitat, leaving "Location" blank?

  Posted May 24, 2013 11:16 PM

• by SandersClan

  I would go with what you said first.

  Posted May 24, 2013 11:25 PM

• by Nye

  Thanks. What about more general guidelines, though?

  Posted May 25, 2013 12:18 AM

• by cerabilia scientist

  Location typically is a place or area that you would find on a map, while habitat described the natural setting where the specimen was found. In your example "near Woodlawn" this is the locality and what we would like transcribed. For the moment we aren't asking you to transcribe the additional habitat information "edge of swamps and streams". That part is useful for understanding more about the life history of the specimen, but it isn't a particular location.

  Posted May 25, 2013 2:45 AM

• by ghewson in response to cerabilia's comment.

  For the moment we aren't asking you to transcribe the additional habitat information "edge of swamps and streams"

  Surely that's just what the Habitat and Description field is for?

  Posted May 25, 2013 9:39 AM

• by darryluk

  I agree with ghewson

  Posted May 25, 2013 12:04 PM

• by xairbusdriver

  Maybe cerablia meant "are" instead of "aren't"? It reads better that way and makes more sense to me. But, what do I know?! LOL! I due no eye've maid tiping erez bfour.

  Posted May 25, 2013 6:09 PM