While I whole-heartedly support the proposal to ask genebanks to register unique institution codes, I think this is drifting a bit off topic. The institution codes and accession numbers are to be added as metadata linked to a PUID, not to be used as unique identifiers themselves. The goal is to provide a single, globally unique, persistent identifier for each object/entity (i.e. PGRFA) that can link to existing and local identifiers such as those used by genebanks.

One important point, because there are likely to be multiple local identifiers linked to a PGRFA, it is not sufficient to just use the MCPD descriptors as metadata "properties" with cardinality >1. There needs to be a way to associate the correct institution code with the correct accession number and therefore a need for stronger semantics. The DOI kernal property "RelatedIdentifier" could be used, but must have a unique ID as its target.

Ramona

------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Scientific Analyst, The iPlant Collaborative, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona
Laboratory Research Associate, New York Botanical Garden

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Diederichsen, Axel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,

So, perhaps the first steps to arrive at some standard numbering are to (1) request genebanks to implement an essential minimum of the FAO Multicrop passport descriptors and, where necessary, to help genebanks to do so, (2) make each genebank suggesting unique accession identifiers, which may require combinations of the two or more of the essential FAO Multi passport descriptors, and (3) ensure all genebanks/collections  have a unique Institute Code registered, for example, in WIEWS? The latter would require that FAO will continue to exist and to maintain WIEWS. Perhaps FOA is more permament than the places that assign DOIs?

Axel

-----Original Message-----
From: Global Information System on PGRFA [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Matija Obreza
Sent: March-13-15 12:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Metadata fields

Following Axel’s message, these are accessions with INSTCODE=RUS001 and ACCENUMB=10

https://www.genesys-pgr.org/acn/RUS001/10

Genesys PGR portal and probably EURISCO use genus to differentiate between these accessions.


As for the mandatory fields: INSTCODE, ACCENUMB and GENUS are a must, everything else must be optional.

Note that in the odd case where an accession is reclassified (or taxonomy changes) it may be assigned a different genus and the connection is lost (hence the PUIDs).


Best,

Matija Obreza
Global Crop Diversity Trust
Platz der Vereinten Nationen 7
53113 Bonn, Germany
Office: +49 228 85427 128
www.croptrust.org

Conserving Crop Diversity, Forever


########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the GLIS-PGRFA-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=GLIS-PGRFA-L&A=1

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the GLIS-PGRFA-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=GLIS-PGRFA-L&A=1



To unsubscribe from the GLIS-PGRFA-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=GLIS-PGRFA-L&A=1