On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:24:49 -0800 in K Barrett wrote:

Relevance is different for different people. Of course you know that. (I
don't know why I said it.) When asked point blank what would be relevant
for me, I always drop back to good scientific articles. Written on a
college level (not a grad school level - I'm not that smart, but I can
google if I need to) A good article on orchid scents might be good. An
article on whether light intensity or duration is more important in getting
orchids to bloom. I think windowsill growers would like to know that,
since their access to light is limited. On OrchidSafari tonight we're going
to be given a talk about the first meeting of teh Chinese Cymbidium society
in Beijing. Probably just some local color and some pics. 4-5 notable
speakers were present to talk on conservation themes. Why couldn't these
talks be reprinted in teh AOS mag? Same with the meeting in S Africa later
this year? Or the one coming up in Costa Rica?

I wouldn't be opposed to scientific (academic) articles appearing in
a non-academic magazine. However, I can't see AOS seeking to fund
something as straight forward as a light duration vs. intensity study.
I can see it as a valid research project for botany or horticulture
post-grads or faculty, but their goal would be to publish in an academic
periodical.

(Not that I'd be opposed to such a study myself).
--
Chris Dukes
elfick willg: you can't use dell to beat people, it wouldn't stand up
to the strain... much like attacking a tank with a wiffle bat