Code Table Request - New part name midbody

[Jegelewicz]

Issue Documentation is http://handbook.arctosdb.org/how_to/How-to-Use-Issues-in-Arctos.html

Goal Help a new collection get into Arctos

Context New terms/combinations of terms.

Aplacophoran molluscs are honorary worms whose head and tail ends are taxonomically informative whereas the middle region of the body is uniform and boring. We often cut them in thirds and put the head and tail in the same container of formalin / glutaraldehyde and the “midbody” region would just be the middle third or less that would potentially be further divvied out into ethanol, RNAlater, and/or cryo. If “head, tail” is ok can I please have “midbody” too?

Table https://arctos.database.museum/info/ctDocumentation.cfm?table=ctspecimen_part_name

Value midbody midbody (frozen) midbody (RNAlater)

Definition Middle third of the body. Preservation unknown

Collection type Inv

Attribute data type N/A

Attribute value N/A

Attribute units N/A

Part tissue flag yes

Other ID BaseURL N/A

Priority Please assign a priority-label.

[ebraker]

would "preservation unknown" be part of this definition (and others) you've recently requested? Seems unnecessary to include it in the part definition.

[dustymc]

I like being explicit, mostly for the data entry folks.

[Jegelewicz]

would "preservation unknown" be part of this definition (and others) you've recently requested? Seems unnecessary to include it in the part definition.

Agree with Dusty. It does seem unnecessary, but also it adds clarity for those students entering data. Of course we aren't being consistent at all and SOOOOOOOOO many parts have no definition, so there's that.

[Jegelewicz]

Add midbody but use part preservation.

[Jegelewicz]

midbody added.

[Jegelewicz]

I supposedly added this part name, but I don't see it in the code table, neither do I find it in the recent part/preservation separation scheme. (see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AY1EXQzKUSAg9EvZFjayTXcCBciXd_syCxt0GSX2tww/edit?usp=sharing)

@dustymc did I ever add it? If so, what the heck did we decide to do here?

[dustymc]

I deleted all unused parts somewhere during that migration, probably got it there.

FWIW adding not-parts to our parts list sounds like an even worse idea now that we've made significant progress in the opposite direction. This is a condition, maybe an "anatomical direction," I can't understand how it's a part.

[Jegelewicz]

Yeah - ALMNH:Inv will now have things identified as "midbody" so we need to figure out the best path forward for that stuff.

Here is what I suggest:

part name = tissue part remark = midbody part attribute type = "anatomical direction reference" part attribute value = mid

There are other paths that could work - @kmkocot how would this work best for you?

[Jegelewicz]

ALMNH Inv chose not to use the term - closing