Subject: ANN00006cn

Full subject data (JSON)

Comments

• by rocketmouse

  There are three labels? I'm not sure if the plant type is contested or just additional people finding it. Have only transcribed bottom label

  Posted June 25, 2013 1:51 PM

• by nosenabook

  And you were right to do so. The others are later additions, as other people check the identification. You can tell by the dates.

  Posted June 25, 2013 2:07 PM

• by nosenabook

  As for WHY they check the ID, you'd have to ask an expert, and you're in the right place for that.

  Posted June 25, 2013 2:07 PM

• by El_Lion

  I usually take the newest name and then the rest from the first record. I thought that's what got recommended somewhere in the forum.

  Posted June 25, 2013 2:13 PM

• by darryluk

  No it's the name from the first record that you transcribe. (as far as I know )

  Posted June 25, 2013 2:48 PM

• by darryluk

  ie the original collector.

  Posted June 25, 2013 2:50 PM

• by ghewson

  It's undecided whether to use the original or the latest determination

  Posted June 25, 2013 7:38 PM

• by ghewson

  See http://talk.notesfromnature.org/#/boards/BNN0000003/discussions/DNN000007u

  Posted June 25, 2013 7:38 PM

• by ghewson

  I've been keeping notes, which I'd be happy to share if we had a wiki...

  Posted June 25, 2013 7:39 PM

• by darryluk

  I guess if they consider original note as 'extremely' valuable in confirming the later notes, the original is the way to go,just my opinion!

  Posted June 25, 2013 7:55 PM

• by El_Lion

  I guess we would really need an "additional information" field. 😦
  On the other hand, if records don't match people will look into them.

  Posted June 26, 2013 8:19 AM