• Bryan McLean

    Thanks to the authors for an excellent primer on Geome – a big step forward to promote archiving sample metadata. One question for the creators: what are the capabilities for linking institutional samples (i.e., archived samples) with derived genetic data? For example, the Geome template can be designed to include an institutional ID (OwnerInstitutionCode) but I dont see capability to include an archival number. This is a crucial bit of metadata for sequences derived from specimens that can be included as a sample feature in a direct GenBank upload (albeit a bit clunkily). Any prospects for including additional Darwin Core fields for catalog numbers?

    • John

      Thanks for the excellent comment. Without diving too far into the world of persistent identifiers, i can attempt a brief answer here. Geome automatically creates a materialSampleID on submission which is made by appending a locally unique identifier onto a root identifier, thereby creating a persistent and resolvable globally unique identifier (GUID). The local identifier is yours to create & manage but must be unique within each expedition and must not contain certain special characters that interfere with archival resource key (ARK) generation (these rules are enforced at validation). So, if you have an existing persistent identifier for a sample you have a couple of choices: 1) use your local identifier as the materialSampleID which will create the GUID for you, or 2) if you are already have an identifier that is resolvable (beginning, for example with http://) use the occurrenceID field (included in the template already) to store your archival sample ID and generate a new materialSampleID (localID). One other option which i noticed we don’t offer on the template is dwc:catalogNumber, which we can easily add if you need it.

      • Bryan McLean

        Gotcha. Makes sense to repeat an archival ID as the occurrenceID (for those specimens, etc.. already with a digital presence, if Im understanding you correctly). But adding a catalogNumber may be more straightforward in some cases, and would be great to see it as an option. Thanks John!