How To Label Fossils

[Cainozoic]

I have an extensive collection of minerals and fossils that I am only now finding time to organise and display. I found the minerals relatively easy to group and label including information such as locality, date of collection, chemical composition, name origin and mineral group such as oxide, phosphate etc. When it comes to the labelling of fossils I am finding it hard to find consensus. What information should I include? It is easy enough to group things biologically into groups such as ammonites, brachiopods, graptolites etc but what specifics should be included? I was toying with the idea of just putting the most detailed description as possible such as Hildoceras bifrons for species, an age range, some interesting fact and a location. Is this too simple? Can anyone give me an example of how they label thier fossils for presentation?

Cheers,

Cain

[rejd]

I use a program called Trilobase. You can try it for free and put in up to 100 fossils. If you like it and want to add more it is $20. It is money well spent. You can add as much information as you like and is very easy to use.

[Missourian]

On cards, I include the code (always still a work in progress....), type, genus and species (if known), member/formation, and locale.

I include the rest of the information (eg. dimensions, additional notes) in a spreadsheet.

And I can't bring myself to mark anything on my fossils. To keep the fossil and information together, I photograph each specimen (or group of specimens), give the specimen(s) a code (eg. BpAr-Neospirifer-1), and include the code into the image file name.

[Cainozoic]

Awesome, I will check out trilobase. I like the idea of a spreadsheet to record extra data, there is just so much you can put on one label before it becomes illegible. I too can't bring myself to mark my fossils although many I have purchased are already marked. Thank you for the tips guys!

[silcrete]

2nd vote for trilobase, it is so much more than a spreadsheet or basic database.

Matt

[MarleysGh0st]

Another vote for TriloBase, here!

As a collections volunteer at PRI, though, I want to encourage collectors to get over their inhibitions about marking specimens with catalog numbers. Detailed descriptions and photographs are nice, but you'll be multiplying someone's work if they have to use those to match up specimens, some day, because they don't have catalog numbers. Mark them (in an relative inconspicuous place) with an archival pen. If the specimens are too small for that, place them in a zip-lock plastic bag, with the catalog number written on a small slip of paper inside the bag.

As for what information to record: location, location, location! The taxonomic classification of a specimen may change over the years, likewise the name of the formation you found it in and the estimates for that formation's age. But only you as the collector can precisely document where the specimen came from.

We've been studying the subject of georeferencing. This presentation from a recent workshop on the subject at the Yale Peabody Museum discusses good and bad locality descriptions.

[jpc]

Thanks for the nice link, Marleysghost. I have been taking field notes for decades and I found some tidbits in there that will make my notes even better for the next 30 years. A little off topic of how to actually label fossils, but it is all part of the info that goes with the fossil.

I would add a field photo helps. I also use small dry erase boards for field photos of fossils. I write on them what the fossil is and make sure it is also in the photo along with the fossil. Also if you take field photos of localities, a photo before r after the field photo of the same dry erase board with notes on it. Otherwise it is way too easy to look at you r pictures two weeks later and say to yourself, Hmmm... that's an interesting shot of the landscape, but why did I take it?

[rejd]

I mark all my specimens and then record the data in Trilobase as noted above. I used the following paper from Amy Davidson of the AMNH to put together a kit for labeling my fossils.

Fossil Labeling.pdf

[TourmalineGuy]

I'll put my own plug out there for Trilobase. While I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to create a spreadsheet to keep track of fossils, Trilobase does a great job of sorting all the possible details one might want and is easy to upload photos to. It also has geologic time periods already programmed in so you merely have to select the appropriate time (for those fossils for which a more specific period is not known). It is very easy to back up (definitely do that) and transfer to new computers. It was 20 dollars well spent.

I have just started labeling my collection and wish I had started earlier. Thanks for the references rejd and MarleysGhost, it puts a new perspective on how I've been choosing to label my fossils.

I use a similar program for my mineral collection: http://carlesmillan.cat/min/main.php?source=z1FFC2-001CE

Roddy

[Raistlin]

Trilobase is awesome, and as already mentioned well worth the $20. I have even contacted the guy who made it a few times with questions and always got a response. The response always came with in a few days (I assume he leads a busy life as many of us do), but he was still pretty quick to respond and always willing to help.

[collector]

Does anyone know of a program that is compatible with a Mac?

[Regg Cato]

+1 for trilobase; very useful for marshaling all your info in one location. I can understand why one would have inhibitions with actually writing on specimens, but I agree with MarleysGh0st about the merits of labeling them. I've been doing it for years and it's a very useful way of keeping things organized. Just make sure you've established a numbering system before you go writing on specimens; I changed my accession numbering system a few years ago, and as a result I now have, for example, specimens of Mucrospirifer thedfordensis labeled "6741" and, for example, 2011.4.72.