Please email us if you notice any corrections that need to be made.
Welcome the UCR Herbarium's Inventory Databases
The UCR collection is completely computerized (at least, as humanly possible). Every specimen in the stacks is, in principle, represented by a record in UCR database. Every specimen not in the stacks but with a printed herbarium label slipped in its newspaper sheet or glued to its herbarium sheet is also represented by a database record. Occasionally we come across specimens that have inadvertently been skipped over in the data entry process. We correct every error we come across as well as those mentioned to us by others. Every new specimen record entered must have longitude-latitude data. If the collector does not supply that data, we look up the given location on a paper or electronic map and add the coordinates ourselves. Currently about 85% of our California specimens have latlongs.
The word "databases" is used in the titles of this web page and the section of that page you are currently reading. There is really only one database powered by Filemaker 8.5 running on the herbarium's local network. Any botanist or researcher visiting the herbarium has access to the actual specimens in the stacks. For those not visiting the herbarium, we offer access via the web to the data of those specimens. The datasets available on the web are not quite current (copies are used rather than the active system), but they are updated every month. We hope to add about 1000 new records with each monthly update. Certain specimens (ca. 1000) are not been displayed because of various sensitivity issues, mostly having to do with current research or contracts with temporary confidentiality requirements.
We offer two interfaces for access to the UCR data. One is based on Filemaker (indicated by FM). The other uses an alternative method of accessing the data (indicated by NF). The Filemaker interface (FM) provides access to the UCR Inventory (specimens in the stacks including the lichens and associated fungi), the codes used in the database for the countries of the world, the three letter codes used for the scientific families and the lichens and associated fungi by themselves without the vasculars. The alternative interface (NF) currently is available for the lichens and associated fungi as well as the vasculars by themselves. The links are on the sidebar to the left. Each link leads to a user guide to each interface and the link to the actual interface. Reading the user guide is helpful in using the discussed interface. Also very useful to read is the description of the the main database above which gives important details on how the database is organized.
The data entry work was supported by financing from the National Science Foundation, the UCR Center for Conservation Biology, and contributors to the herbarium "various donors" account. The people who actually did the work include Teresa Salvato, Brandon Mattrux, Trinity Ryan, Melissa Mattrux, Kyle Boyd, Loni Bachor, Chris Glover, Mitch Provance and others. Barbara Pitzer made the first entries in the earliest version of the system back in 1988 and was actively involved, a key person, in the whole process until she became ill and eventually passed away in Sept. 2002. Her interest and commitment kept the process moving during times when no outside funding was available. Andrew Sanders, the curator, watched over the whole process and did some entry as well. The data structure was developed by Ed Plummer and Andrew Sanders with interaction with the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden herbarium (RSA), which has adopted the UCR database structure.
Note on names
Records are entered under the names the specimens are filed by at UCR. In some cases, this does not reflect the use in the most recent regional floras. These divergences can be either the result of our not having updated a particular genus (rare) or of our consciously not using some recently used name (common). For example, we do not use either the names Chamaesyce or Vulpia (both used in The Jepson Manual) because it is the curator's opinion that use of these genera would leave Euphorbia and Festuca as paraphyletic groups. In general, we probably tend to err on the side of broader circumscription of genera and narrower delimitation of species. Our families are pretty traditional and rather broad. The "lilioid" monocots are all treated in a very broad Liliaceae, largely out of exasperation with the instability of the classification of these plants. Once things settle down, we'll adopt some more modern system. We always use the family names with the "-aceae" ending and family names are abbreviated using the system of acronyms proposed by W.A. Weber (Taxon, 1982). We have tried to keep the nomenclature straight so that at least each species is filed under only one name, but in some cases (especially across state/published flora boundaries) a species may be filed under synonyms in different genera. You would be well to check under major recently used names when searching the name fields.
If you have additional information that you would like to see on this web site, please contact Andrew.Sandersucr.edu