{"title":"苔藓植物标本组织和储存系统:工作人员实践和用户偏好的比较评估","authors":"Robin A. Lewis, Jessica M. Budke","doi":"10.1639/0007-2745-125.2.222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Discussions of curation practices for bryophyte collections have a long history in the literature dating back to the 19th and 20th centuries. This study aims to 1) document and synthesize the range of bryophyte storage and organization systems staff report using in European and North American herbaria, as well as the rationale behind these practices; 2) compare/contrast these practices and rationale with the curation preferences and rationale of active herbarium users; and 3) facilitate further discussion regarding practices for curating bryophyte collections. We collected survey data regarding staff curation practices at and user curation preferences for bryophyte collections in Europe and North America. We used regression models and thematic analysis to analyze our quantitative data and qualitative data, respectively. We found that institutional demographics, such as geographic location, institution type, and total herbarium size are significant predictors of bryophyte specimen storage and organization practices, and that user demographics, such as age, active bryology research agenda, and current primary title were significant predictors of the storage preferences of herbarium users. The most common theme that emerged in the practice/preference explanations of staff members and herbarium users was convenience/accessibility. Other prevalent themes in staff and user explanations for their bryophyte curation practices/preferences include physical factors, inherited tradition, lack of expertise, and phylogenetic/taxonomic concerns. Our findings also suggest the context in which members of the bryological community operate plays a significant role in shaping individuals' curation practices/preferences, including both institutional and user demographics. We conclude by offering a discussion of recommendations for bryophyte specimen storage and organization at herbaria.","PeriodicalId":55319,"journal":{"name":"Bryologist","volume":"125 1","pages":"222 - 247"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bryophyte specimen organization and storage systems: A comparative assessment of staff practices and user preferences\",\"authors\":\"Robin A. Lewis, Jessica M. Budke\",\"doi\":\"10.1639/0007-2745-125.2.222\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. Discussions of curation practices for bryophyte collections have a long history in the literature dating back to the 19th and 20th centuries. This study aims to 1) document and synthesize the range of bryophyte storage and organization systems staff report using in European and North American herbaria, as well as the rationale behind these practices; 2) compare/contrast these practices and rationale with the curation preferences and rationale of active herbarium users; and 3) facilitate further discussion regarding practices for curating bryophyte collections. We collected survey data regarding staff curation practices at and user curation preferences for bryophyte collections in Europe and North America. We used regression models and thematic analysis to analyze our quantitative data and qualitative data, respectively. We found that institutional demographics, such as geographic location, institution type, and total herbarium size are significant predictors of bryophyte specimen storage and organization practices, and that user demographics, such as age, active bryology research agenda, and current primary title were significant predictors of the storage preferences of herbarium users. The most common theme that emerged in the practice/preference explanations of staff members and herbarium users was convenience/accessibility. Other prevalent themes in staff and user explanations for their bryophyte curation practices/preferences include physical factors, inherited tradition, lack of expertise, and phylogenetic/taxonomic concerns. Our findings also suggest the context in which members of the bryological community operate plays a significant role in shaping individuals' curation practices/preferences, including both institutional and user demographics. We conclude by offering a discussion of recommendations for bryophyte specimen storage and organization at herbaria.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bryologist\",\"volume\":\"125 1\",\"pages\":\"222 - 247\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bryologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745-125.2.222\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PLANT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bryologist","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745-125.2.222","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Bryophyte specimen organization and storage systems: A comparative assessment of staff practices and user preferences
Abstract. Discussions of curation practices for bryophyte collections have a long history in the literature dating back to the 19th and 20th centuries. This study aims to 1) document and synthesize the range of bryophyte storage and organization systems staff report using in European and North American herbaria, as well as the rationale behind these practices; 2) compare/contrast these practices and rationale with the curation preferences and rationale of active herbarium users; and 3) facilitate further discussion regarding practices for curating bryophyte collections. We collected survey data regarding staff curation practices at and user curation preferences for bryophyte collections in Europe and North America. We used regression models and thematic analysis to analyze our quantitative data and qualitative data, respectively. We found that institutional demographics, such as geographic location, institution type, and total herbarium size are significant predictors of bryophyte specimen storage and organization practices, and that user demographics, such as age, active bryology research agenda, and current primary title were significant predictors of the storage preferences of herbarium users. The most common theme that emerged in the practice/preference explanations of staff members and herbarium users was convenience/accessibility. Other prevalent themes in staff and user explanations for their bryophyte curation practices/preferences include physical factors, inherited tradition, lack of expertise, and phylogenetic/taxonomic concerns. Our findings also suggest the context in which members of the bryological community operate plays a significant role in shaping individuals' curation practices/preferences, including both institutional and user demographics. We conclude by offering a discussion of recommendations for bryophyte specimen storage and organization at herbaria.
期刊介绍:
The Bryologist is an international journal devoted to all aspects of bryology and lichenology, and we welcome reviews, research papers and short communications from all members of American Bryological and Lichenological Society (ABLS). We also publish lists of current literature, book reviews and news items about members and event. All back issues of the journal are maintained electronically. The first issue of The Bryologist was published in 1898, with the formation of the Society.
Author instructions are available from the journal website and the manuscript submission site, each of which is listed at the ABLS.org website.
All submissions to the journal are subject to at least two peer reviews, and both the reviews and the identities of reviewers are treated confidentially. Reviewers are asked to acknowledge possible conflicts of interest and to provide strictly objective assessments of the suitability and scholarly merit of the submissions under review.