A new update to the Excel Record Card (ERC)

The current version of the ERC was published almost 3 years ago in January 2017. It incorporated some new taxa and some background coding changes to highlight archaeophyte species.

Since its original design, the ERC has relied on recorders using a set of unique initials, rather than their full names, to force uniformity and prevent spelling errors.  However, records are still stored in the SBRS master databases with initials in place of full names.

Historically, this system allowed the use of a limited number of multiple recorders initials to be converted back to full names, but increased recording for the Flora made it untenable. Although multiple sets of initials could still be entered on the ERC, it became necessary during the conversion process to restrict recorders names to that of the lead recorder followed by et al.

However, the current system allows the identification of only one recorder in the data sent to the BSBI, which is unfair on any additional recorders. Converting the output from the ERC into the format required for submission to the BSBI involves changing initials to names using a database maintained by Paul Harmes and adapted by me for the ERC. A unique set of initials has to be assigned to every new recorder, and because we also had to do this for all the historical recorders whose data was used in the Flora, this database now has nearly 3,000 entries.

Planned changes

A new version of the ERC will be available to download from the SBRS website in early January, coinciding with the creation of a new SBRS database which will contain records submitted from 1/1/2020, in line with the end of the BSBI’s Atlas 2020 project and the start of a new date class.

The new ERC will have one significant change from the current version in that it will require names rather than initials on the Entry sheet page. The issue of data integrity due to mis-spelling and incorrect formatting has been resolved by the use of a drop-down list of names from which the submitter must select. It allows the entry of multiple names, formatted as Surname, Initials; Surname, Initials; etc. A maximum of three names is allowed and if more recorders were present et al. can be selected from the list. You cannot enter names not in the drop-down list, so if your name is not there, please contact me. I anticipate updating the names list about twice a year, but as an interim measure you can select ‘Guest recorder’ and give your full name in the email when you submit the record file.

On the Recorders page you will see a full list of recorders names upon which the drop-down list is based. It contains all current members of the SBRS, all those who are not members but have submitted records since 2000, together with a few others. In addition there is a list headed determiners, which includes all the current BSBI referees, together with various other people who have verified records before. If you need to add a determiner’s name to your ERC output file you MUST copy and paste name from this list. If your determiner is not listed please add the details to the email used to submit your file, copied to me, so the list can be updated.

Please take the time to read the  basic instructions on the Instructions page, even if you are a regular user. A link to the detailed instruction document, downloadable from the SBRS web site, is on this page.

The future

I plan to introduce a version of the ERC for use in 2021 incorporating Stace edition 4 changes. The delay will allow more time for members to become accustomed to the new taxonomy and nomenclature so that the new ERC will not come as such a shock!

We are also looking at alternative record submission formats, including perhaps apps for mobile devices. The BSBI still requests vice-county recorders to submit records via MapMate. We feel that record submission is easier for members with the ERC rather than using MapMate (as members of the Surrey Botanical Society do) although this involves more work by those who process your records. Other systems such as Living Record and iRecord all have weaknesses. Ideally the BSBI will develop a new record submission model to replace MapMate, based on their own database.

If any member with experience in database software development would like to become involved in reviewing and advising on the SBRS model, we would be delighted to hear from you.