Author Topic: Classification  (Read 838 times)

Rossano

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
Classification
« on: October 12, 2016, 04:25:30 PM »
I have a big problem.

I am trying to build an excel sheet with the classification of the models I buy. I do like this.

I buy a model, mainly looking for groups of animals that I still don't have, starting from classes and then going down to orders, families and other intermediate groups.

Then I identify the precise species, and build back the classificationtree. First the genus, then the family and so on.

In this way I arrive to the point where the various animals' classification trees link together forming a complete structure, pending from the first devide biota/abiota.

Until now I tried to get the classification infos from wikipedia, and even if I often found different systems of classification used for different animals files, I could manage to reasonably solve the mismatchings.

But now I began looking into the direction of extinct animals, and here comes the armageddon. A total mess. A tragedy.

How can I find a solution? Is there a place where I can get a complete classification of the extinct animals?

Please help me, I am a desperate taxonomist.



stargatedalek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
    • View Profile
Re: Classification
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2016, 08:29:34 PM »
Short answer is no that's not possible, there are things we simply don't know.
Upcoming start-up figurine line, feedback wanted: http://animaltoyforum.com/index.php?topic=1991.new#new

sbell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
    • View Profile
    • Fauna Figures Toys & Collectables
Re: Classification
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2016, 10:38:26 PM »
Trying to work out the current classification of modern animals is hard enough, to say nothing of extinct ones. The paleobiology database site is a good place to start, although it is not always complete either. Sometimes it's just a matter of chasing down primary references. For every taxon. No biggie!

bmathison1972

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Re: Classification
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2016, 03:22:41 AM »
I too am an obsesive taxonomist, but I am not so worried about it with regards to my collection inventory. My excel sheet is arranged with these columns:

Figure (common and scientific names--I hate common names but since many figures are sold under them I use them here)
Category (taxonomic order)--keep in mind I only collect arthropods
Manufacturer
Series
Number
Year

I keep them sorted by: Category, Figure, Manufacturer for quick reference, so species are alphabetical within a given order, and then alphabetical by manufacturer.

If you talk to me by pvt message, we can exchange emails and I can share it with you.

brontodocus

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2934
  • "Et tu, Bronte?"
    • View Profile
    • brontodocus at uni
Re: Classification
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2016, 10:17:48 AM »
Mikko's Phylogeny Archive may not be peer-reviewed but I'd recommend it nonetheless: http://www.helsinki.fi/~mhaaramo/
I still have to work out a taxonomic database of my figures, currently they are arranged by company. However, since I have photographed most of my figures I have photo albums of them arranged by major taxonomic groups (well sometimes not so major, I have a Lucanidae album). I uploaded these to facebook but honestly, these albums are largely for my own orientation.



Rossano

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
Re: Classification
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2016, 08:34:22 PM »
Brotondocus you are my hero!  ;D

This is a fantistic source, and that's exactly the kind or thing I was looking for.

Now I have to browse a bit the groups where I can find dinos and the other prehistoric animals, very curious to see what's going on here.

Will be back later!

sbell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
    • View Profile
    • Fauna Figures Toys & Collectables
Re: Classification
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2016, 10:29:38 PM »
I have an Access Database that I maintain with separate tables for collection, taxonomy, distributions, manufacturers, etc. And all of these are of course linked in a massive database map. And every figure is linked to at least one photo...that is a really big file as well.

It is about ten years old now, and there are parts of it I don't like of course (but changing it now would be a small nightmare). The taxonomy I tend to use is as much functional as phylogenetic--for example, fish and mammals are classed in much greater detail than, say, birds or arthropods, which I don't tend to collect much.

It is often a problem anyway, especially in prehistoric animals, which don't tend to fit our categories easily. And even the site given by Bronotdocus has some questionable points in it; taxonomy is never finished.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2016, 10:31:18 PM by sbell »