Specimen Barcode and Labeling Survey Results

These are the compiled verbatim Specimen Barcode and Labeling Survey Results from December 2014. Respondent counts are in the parenthesis: (10) means 10 people chose that response. This page is part of a larger coverage of the topic at Specimen Barcode and Labeling Guide

What kinds of collections do you work with?

(29) Paper - Herbarium sheets, packets, fungal boxes
(27) Fluid - alcohol, etc.
(20) Dry - Paleo boxes, mammal skin attachments
(18) Pinned
(7) Other collection types:

• all vertebrate preparations
• cleared and stained in glycerin, tissues
• DNA
• labels, datasheets, media, etc.
• microslides
• slides
• whole skeletons, mounted and prepared skeletons (taxidermy)

Do you use barcodes on your specimens?

(36) Yes
(25) No

Why has your collection decided against barcoding at this time? Do you anticipate moving to barcodes in the future? What factors would lead you to adopt barcodes?

• Barcodes do not fit well within our current system. Our database has fields for specimen location, so a barcode is not needed for the outside of the case. All the specimens are visible, no barcode needed on the outside of a tray/box. Also there is a fear of the barcode program becoming obsolete...if a scanner breaks in 50 years with there be one around that will be able to read the old barcodes?
• Barcoding works best for inventory control, such as in retail stores where items are sold and inventory needs replacing. We can track our specimens using location codes and their catalog number.
• Cost and number of specimens is the main reason we do not have barcodes. We plan to move to using code 39 barcodes in the future, but need to assess if we will adopt them museum wide or department by department. If we could easily print/produce self-adhering, archival quality barcodes at a low cost that would lead us to adopt them faster.
• Cost per unit effort is too high. In fish collections the only gain to be had by using barcodes is processing of loans and inventories and due to the fact that we process a comparatively small number of specimens in each loan, the cost of attaching barcodes to every jar is just too high.
• Funding lacking, staffing lacking, potential for future shift making barcodes archaic. Might move to this in future but not first priority.
• Havn't decided against it - would love to move to barcodes ... just a time resources & someone to manage the implentation at this point to stopping us adopt it
• I'm worried about the longevity of the adhesive, and so far no one has presented a more convincing argument to me than "well, libraries use them".
• Just haven't done it yet. Yes. Best practices.
• Maybe we're just set in our ways, but we don't feel that we will save any time by adding barcodes. It might end up being a wise investment in the time to learn new software and change our ways, but the choice belongs to those higher up in our administration.
• No convient place to attach barcodes. Collection is not entirely cataloged or digitized. Time and money.
• Our collections are all catalogued with hand written tags and individual catalog numbers. Barcoding wouldn't make sense when working with larger vertebrate preparations. I can see moving to barcodes as our cryo-tissue collections start to grow and at that point we may add them to the corresponding specimen in the main collection.
• The size of our collection (>5 million specimens) makes the costs and labor involved in barcoding prohibitive. We also do not track the specific location of fossils within their cabinets, so it is unclear if barcoding would add much value.
• We anticipate barcoding slides, vials of raw samples, and boxes of SEM stubs in the future.
• We are actively considering barcodes or perhaps QR codes. The versatility of QR codes and broad range of freely available QR code readers codes may be considered for automated digitization of our collections. We're in the process of looking into best practices for barcoding and labeling our wide array of biological research collections.
• We did not decide against it, just not enough inertia or money to do so at a large scale. Also, using barcodes with alcohol collections is a problem- where to attach the barcode, what if the specimens are very small, how to deal with multiple vials within a single jar, etc. We use barcodes in Botany, but no other natural history collection so far. Barcodes are applied to newer collections if part of the grant requirements/objectives.
• We did not use initially due to expense, but will be switching in the coming year.
• We don't use barcodes at the moment due to the financial and logistical cost to move to this kind of system. We might move to barcodes in the future--but it is certainly a ways off. If more paleontological collections used barcodes, we might think about it. And, if the costs came down.
• We have been printing barcodes 3/9 on labels for the past 5 plus years whenever a new label needs to be generated. In practice though we rarely find the need to scan a barcode.
• We might look into it in the future - we don't know of other paleontological collections using barcodes, and have not seriously considered it as an option.
• We plan to add barcodes but we have not been able to decide on if we should use our existing catalog numbers or start with brand new barcode numbers.
• We started databasing material more than 20 years ago. We use local unique identifiers but not the bar-codes. Since we had a lot of material already in the database, we decided to follow existing practice and did not see where it may help us to speed up the process.
• We want to eventually start using barcodes. We need to decide if we are going to use our current catalog numbers or start with a whole new barcode numbering system. We will be looking to others for their experiences.

What make and model of barcode reader do you use?

• AHS Sky
• Datalogic Gryphon GM4400
• Datalogic QS2500
• Datalogic PowerScan 7000BT SRI
• E-rainbow
• Fosmon
• Honeywell 4820
• (2) Honeywell Xenon 1900
• HP EY022AT Bar Code Reader
• ID automation
• (3) many, various, I don't know
• Metrologic MS9520
• MS9540 Grey Voyager HH scanner w/Perp Codegate USB-A POS Kit/Stand no P/S Type A
• PowerScan 7000 SRI Industrial Strength Imaging Scanner (2D, USB, High Density and POT Cable).
• (2) Symbol
• (3) Symbol LS2208
• (2) Symbol DS6608 & DS6708
• Symbol DS6878; in the future I like to work with the Baracoda Roadrunners Evolution 2D
• USB Automatic Barcode Scanner Scanning Barcode Bar-code Reader with Hands Free Adjustable Stand
• Wasp WDI4500 2D Barcode Scanner
• WelchAllyn IT 3800

How does your barcode reader communicate with your computer?

All respondents said via USB

Would you recommend your barcode reader?

All of the respondents said 'Yes' except the person who has the Datalogic PowerScan 7000BT SRI because "We encountered significant programming problems in just getting the readers to be USB compatible. Though they function wonderfully now, it took a direct hardware patch from Datalogic to make USB connection"