Given that ISIS is currently and may forever be a thing of the past I was wondering if anyone has come upon another database that may be able to substitute for it. I know of Global Species and I know some may not have particularly good opinions of it, but some may wonder if a database that may have some errors is better than nothing? Are there other sites beyond ISIS (currently MIA, possibly MIA forever) or Global Species (may have some errors)? Of course, I understand ISIS also may have had the occasional error.
ISIS - a thing of the past
- Thread starter MoonBear
- Start date
I think he means from a public-access point of view (i.e. if one is not a member).
And the answer is no, there is nothing else (except regionally, e.g. Zootierliste for Europe)
casuariusb
Member
I don't think ISIS is on the way out, because it is being restructured as ZIMS (Zoological Information Management System) but Chlidonias is right, currently the access to the database is restricted to members only. Lets hope ZIMS will reinstate public access. The old ISIS database was very useful.
when public access to ISIS stopped the site consistently implied it was only temporary until the change-over to ZIMS was complete and that public access would then be returned. Later they appear to have dropped that. But we all live in hope.
it should probably be noted that the Global Species site (Global Species : Institutions, Zoos, etc.) is mostly just listing the same animals as reported on ISIS (before access was removed). You can see this from it listing exactly the same ghost entries and mistakes as on ISIS (e.g. elephant seal at San Diego, gemsbok at Auckland, vulturine guineafowl at Orana).
Every year I update my site index.html
Having an access to ZIMS, I use this information. Also I use www.Zootierliste.de, EARAZA database http://earaza.ru/wps/wp-content/uploads/Сборник-ЕАРАЗА-No.-31-том-II.pdf and my own zoo visits. Unfortunately, I do it alone and it's a huge work, that's why I able to do it for a limited number of mammals (550), birds (600) and reptiles (350). I tried to choose more attractive and rare animals. Also, sometimes I mind subspecies and sometimes not, but anyway you could see at least a general information.
Trying to figure out which zoo is the best by collection, I assigned a number of stars to each animal (in my opinion). For example okapi - 5 stars, Potto - one star, etc. As a result, the program summarizes all the results and here Stat.html you can see that. Once again, as I update this site once in the year in January (and sometimes I do some single changes during the year), a part of information could be out of date.
I would be glad if someone will like my site. Tips and comments are really appreciated.
Having an access to ZIMS, I use this information. Also I use www.Zootierliste.de, EARAZA database http://earaza.ru/wps/wp-content/uploads/Сборник-ЕАРАЗА-No.-31-том-II.pdf and my own zoo visits. Unfortunately, I do it alone and it's a huge work, that's why I able to do it for a limited number of mammals (550), birds (600) and reptiles (350). I tried to choose more attractive and rare animals. Also, sometimes I mind subspecies and sometimes not, but anyway you could see at least a general information.
Trying to figure out which zoo is the best by collection, I assigned a number of stars to each animal (in my opinion). For example okapi - 5 stars, Potto - one star, etc. As a result, the program summarizes all the results and here Stat.html you can see that. Once again, as I update this site once in the year in January (and sometimes I do some single changes during the year), a part of information could be out of date.
I would be glad if someone will like my site. Tips and comments are really appreciated.
zooboy28
Well-Known Member
Wow, there is a lot of info on that site Alex, very impressive. How do you have ZIMS access?
I like the idea of ranking zoos by species, although obviously there is more to a zoo than just its holdings. Also individual species rankings are going to be very subjective - I would probably rank a potto 4 stars for example.
You are absolutely right, every zoo it's not just an animal collection. You can take some Chinese Zoo with the great collection of native animals, but it doesn't mean the zoo is perfect... As for species rankings, as I said, it's just my opinion. I believe you can rank a platypus just one star (you can see it every day), but for me and most of zoo fans it's a top animal.
I am responsible for ZIMS in two zoos where I work, that's why I have a full access.
I still feel it is unfortunate we lost the open access database, esp. when you look beyond just species and into individual holdings.
Sadly, Chinese zoos are not even on the ZIMS.
Sadly, Chinese zoos are not even on the ZIMS.
Hmmm you need it?
I have no idea if public access will ever be restored, but I am pretty sure it won't be till there is a 100% transfer to ZIMS and ARKS is shut down. That is because to do so prior will only give a partial view of holdings, as some records will still be on ARKS till then. Latest list of ZIMS adopters and zoos still scheduled to transfer is here (if a couple of months out of date):
ZIMSlive
As can be seen not far to go now.
The good news is that if access is restored it will be a lot more accurate and up to date than the old ARKS based records. That is because ZIMS is a web based system and records are updated in real time. So as soon as the record keeper in a zoo updates the records, it will be reflected in the ZIMS holdings. ARKS relied in the record keeper uploading data on a regular basis. Most zoos did it monthly but some less often.
What I am particularly interested in is whether the new ZIMS version is interactive / digitally exhanges / copies data / information between institutions? In the past it seemed that animal data had to be entered by all institutions separately when proceeding with animal transfers between institutions thus sometimes losing essential historical (unaccessible) data and sometimes errors crept in producing undesirable double entries.
Once more, I plead the fraternity to re-open some access to full listings of species / collections once the system has fully transferred over to ZIMS.
Once more, I plead the fraternity to re-open some access to full listings of species / collections once the system has fully transferred over to ZIMS.
In replying to Kifaru Bwana I thought I would include a little history and background, as there seems to be some confusion as to what ISIS is and what it does. Sorry if I am covering ground Zoochatters are already familiar with.
ISIS is a member based organisation, and has been around for about 40 years. Its members are mostly zoos, but it is open to any organisation keeping wild animals. "ISIS" stands for International Species Inventory System, and it provides record keeping and population management software for its members. A basic principle of ISIS is that members share data.
Probably the best known software program is the record keeping program ARKS. This is a DOS based program, so dates back to the early days of desktop computers. To give you an idea about how it works, you move a cursor over menu options then click to select. All data is retained in the institutions computer. To meet the data sharing requirements data backups are meant to be sent back to ISIS on a regular basis. Before email became widespread, this involved posting backup discs to ISIS head office in Minnesota.
There was an attempt to produce a Windows version about a decade ago, but I understand it never got beyond Beta testing. Effectively ISIS jumped right over Windows and went to a web based program with ZIMS.
With ZIMS the program and all data is held in the cloud. Obviously this makes it much easier to search and access data across all collections, as it is all held in one common data base. Each individual animal will now have it's own discreet record. When an animal is moved from one zoo to another, the record keeper now just clicks on the animal's record and transfers the right to amend it to the receiving zoo. Thus ISIS records will instantly be updated for each zoos holdings.
With ARKS the sending zoo would print off their ARKS records for the animal and post it off to the receiving zoo. The record officer of the receiving zoo would then enter the data into their ARKS program. Obviously ISIS records would not be updated until the records officer had entered the data, and done a backup to ISIS. The delays in this occurring would be one reason for inaccurate ISIS data that many have noted from time to time. Another problem was incomplete or inaccurate transcription of data. For instance, animals that had moved between several zoos could end up with several different birth dates. ZIMS removes that problem.
One reason it has taken so long to move from ARKS to ZIMS is that the process requires that these errors are corrected as far as possible.
Hope that helps, and happy to answer any other questions.
ISIS is a member based organisation, and has been around for about 40 years. Its members are mostly zoos, but it is open to any organisation keeping wild animals. "ISIS" stands for International Species Inventory System, and it provides record keeping and population management software for its members. A basic principle of ISIS is that members share data.
Probably the best known software program is the record keeping program ARKS. This is a DOS based program, so dates back to the early days of desktop computers. To give you an idea about how it works, you move a cursor over menu options then click to select. All data is retained in the institutions computer. To meet the data sharing requirements data backups are meant to be sent back to ISIS on a regular basis. Before email became widespread, this involved posting backup discs to ISIS head office in Minnesota.
There was an attempt to produce a Windows version about a decade ago, but I understand it never got beyond Beta testing. Effectively ISIS jumped right over Windows and went to a web based program with ZIMS.
With ZIMS the program and all data is held in the cloud. Obviously this makes it much easier to search and access data across all collections, as it is all held in one common data base. Each individual animal will now have it's own discreet record. When an animal is moved from one zoo to another, the record keeper now just clicks on the animal's record and transfers the right to amend it to the receiving zoo. Thus ISIS records will instantly be updated for each zoos holdings.
With ARKS the sending zoo would print off their ARKS records for the animal and post it off to the receiving zoo. The record officer of the receiving zoo would then enter the data into their ARKS program. Obviously ISIS records would not be updated until the records officer had entered the data, and done a backup to ISIS. The delays in this occurring would be one reason for inaccurate ISIS data that many have noted from time to time. Another problem was incomplete or inaccurate transcription of data. For instance, animals that had moved between several zoos could end up with several different birth dates. ZIMS removes that problem.
One reason it has taken so long to move from ARKS to ZIMS is that the process requires that these errors are corrected as far as possible.
Hope that helps, and happy to answer any other questions.
I just picked up the following from the ISIS website regarding security of ZIMS data:
"Public can see who has a species of interest, how many. No more."
Obviously not available yet, I would suggest waiting on all zoos transferring to ZIMS. BTW it states this has been their policy since 1995 so no change from what was available before.
Last edited:
My site may be able to help you with a couple of the collections on your site with my site: https://sites.google.com/site/werrtydryytucf/
While almost all information is accurate, it's a list of species/subspecies I've personally seen at a particular collection and not at all an up-to-date list of species at certain zoos. For example, I know for a fact that Chinese Alligators and Blesbok have left Bronx since I saw them and Yellow-Footed Rock Wallaby, Western Grey Kangaroo, and Cape Barren Goose all appear to have recently left the collection.
But besides that, everything is still correct as far as I'm aware.
And just because I don't have a species listed at a certain collection, doesn't mean they aren't held there anymore. For example, Andean Bear at Smithsonian. So, besides for the five species I listed earlier, if it's on my site then it's most likely still at the collection (unless someone else says otherwise).
And I can personally keep you updated on some changes as I hear them, if you'd like. One in particular is that Beardsley no longer has their Andean Bear and now has Amur Leopard and Mexican Wolves.
For the record, the current total species seen number and the current number of species seen at Bronx are both incorrect until I update them (which may be later today) and I shall be adding on the Newport Aquarium, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Gardens, Tampa's Lowry Park Zoo, and Discovery Cove. In one month's time I should have also visited the New York Aquarium and have that to add on as well.
And I have one question. Why do you, and other site such as Global Species, list the Bronx Zoo's Children Zoo (which doesn't have Western Spotted Skunk anymore though the Mouse House has Eastern) as a separate collection?
~Thylo
Drew
Well-Known Member
I was able to speak briefly to some ISIS representatives at the AZA conference and they told me they are working to get the collections public again. They have had many complaints (mostly from zoochatters I'm sure) about not being able to access this previously accessible information. In the meantime they asked that people e-mail their inquiries
to news@isis.org.
to news@isis.org.
I did this in the summer for one species only and they were very helpful
callorhinus
Well-Known Member
ISIS website has not complicated design but I cannot find some information like annual fee or list of members. Can anyone help me please?