What form should a microbial culture collection network in Australia take? Are we looking at developing a “network of Australian collections of microorganisms” or an “Australian Collections of Microorganisms Network”? Given the institutional nature of Australian collections and the current lack of funding, the former appears to be the way forward at this time. Networking brings efficiencies with respect to user access, standardisation, databases and software. It also brings more visibility to the scale of the collections and the services they provide, which otherwise have insufficient critical mass for exposure or influence on policy makers.

Following the recent formation of CHACM this year, the Australian microbial culture collections are investigating options for networking Australia’s microbial collections. Networks can operate at many different levels from informal information networks to fully coordinated operations. The establishment of AMRRN in 2004 was the first step to network collections and the AMRiN website has been a collaboration to provide basic information to the scientific community. In forming CHACM, members have agreed to work more closely together to provide user access to more detailed information on cultures maintained in the collections, primarily through the NCRIS Atlas of Living Australia project http://www.ala.org.au/ and the AMRiN website.

 The UK National Culture Collection (UKNCC) http://www.ukncc.co.uk/ is an example of a network of independent and independently funded collections working together through a common portal to provide information. The Belgian Coordinated Collections of Microorganisms (BCCM) http://bccm.belspo.be/index.php is an example of a formal federally funded network with four nodes and a coordination unit at the Belgian Federal Science Policy office.

Your suggestions are welcome.

Lindsay Sly