Arctos: New part "trace"

[Jegelewicz]

Issue Documentation is http://handbook.arctosdb.org/how_to/How-to-Use-Issues-in-Arctos.html

Table
http://arctos.database.museum/info/ctDocumentation.cfm?table=CTSPECIMEN_PART_NAME

Value
trace evidence

Definition
The imprint of a track, trail, footprint, burrow, etc, of an organism

Collection type
Mamm

Attribute data type
N/A

Attribute value
N/A

Attribute units
N/A

Part tissue flag
no

Other ID BaseURL
N/A

Context
trace fossil does not work for trace evidence of extant species (the definition of fossil = the remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock.)

Alternatively, we could change trace fossil to trace evidence and use a new definition = The imprint of a track, trail, footprint, burrow, etc, of an organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock.

@ArctosDB/paleontology people should weigh in.

Priority
Please assign a priority-label.

[dustymc]

I don't like "evidence" - is that a cast, description (no-part observation event), photo (part=media), ??? ALL part are evidence - that's why we keep them!

This is closely related to my "objections" (confusion? Lack of better ideas?) surrounding things like "fossil" in part name. ( https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/991, https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1020) "Fossilized" is a preservation method (one that we may not be able to usefully define, but still); it says nothing about what's fossilized. Parts are structurally defined as physical things; this (and fossils, and anything else that's a description of a part instead of just a part) are, at best, awkward. https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/1460

Speaking of awkward... how about part "trace" == "a mark, object, or other indication of the existence or passing of something." with preservation (cast, fossil, etc.) in CTPART_PRESERVATION.

[Jegelewicz]

I'm down with using trace - it sounds awkward, but makes perfect sense. I added the "evidence" because of that...

[Nicole-Ridgwell-NMMNHS]

I'm fine with Dusty's solution, although I have a suggestion for the definition of trace. In the ichnology literature, trace is defined as "morphologically recurrent structure resulting from the life activity of an individual organism (or homotypic organisms) modifying the substrate" Bertling et al.(2006). Names for trace fossils: a uniform approach. Lethaia, 39(3), 265-286. I don't know if those studying modern traces would use a similar definition.

[Jegelewicz]

I love a definition with a citation and it seems like that would apply to the beaver print that started this, but let me check in with Diana to make sure.

[Jegelewicz]

@ArctosDB/Code_Table_Administrators

Summary:

1. new part in code table: trace = physical evidence in the collection of a mark, object, or other indication of the existence or passing of an organism; in ichnology, a morphologically recurrent structure resulting from the life activity of an individual organism (or homotypic organisms) modifying the substrate

2. all "trace fossil" parts should be migrated to "trace" with the part preservation "fossil".

3. "trace fossil" should be removed from the parts code table

[campmlc]

This makes sense.

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 12:06 PM Teresa Mayfield-Meyer <
[email protected]> wrote:

Summary:

1.

new part in code table: trace = a mark, object, or other indication of
the existence or passing of an organism; in ichnology, a morphologically
recurrent structure resulting from the life activity of an individual
organism (or homotypic organisms) modifying the substrate
2.

all "trace fossil" parts should be migrated to "trace" with the part
preservation "fossil".
3.

"trace fossil" should be removed from the parts code table

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/2137?email_source=notifications&email_token=ADQ7JBFFDZ6HTAMMH6KAMK3QRMND5A5CNFSM4H4USWU2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOECYXH5Y#issuecomment-548500471,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADQ7JBCBMSEBHRAEJTA7HNLQRMND5ANCNFSM4H4USWUQ
.

[Nicole-Ridgwell-NMMNHS]

Sounds good to me.

[campmlc]

ACTC meeting 5-21-20 waiting on larger discussion with paleo folks, wait on PG

[Jegelewicz]

closing as now covered in https://github.com/ArctosDB/arctos/issues/2546#issuecomment-657692417