Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
They're all cattleyas now
In case you didn't see this on the OGD, Cassio van den Berg moved everything
but Rhyncholaelia, Guarianthe and the Mexican Laelias into Cattleya. http://www.neodiversity.org/articles/neod3102.pdf or if that doesn't work then try http://www.neodiversity.org/latestarticles.html I asked about L. tenebrosa and got the answer that he puts tenebrosa and lobata etc as varieties of purpurata. I understand he'll be lumping those debatable epidendrums early next year. On a different subject I noticed 'Neodiversity' is an electronic publication that will send printed papers to libraries etc but who basically use electronic means to disseminate their articles...I thought someone one got in trouble for using an electronic publication to publish their work.... was it Braeme? or the kovachii mess? That a hard copy had to be made......? But what do I know. Maybe the few hard copies they send to whatever libraries they use is sufficent for the taxonomy gods. I could be completely misremembering. K Barrett |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
They're all cattleyas now
Oops or brassavola... well maybe I shouldn't have said "everything". He
moved what he moved, *G*. K "K Barrett" wrote in message . .. In case you didn't see this on the OGD, Cassio van den Berg moved everything but Rhyncholaelia, Guarianthe and the Mexican Laelias into Cattleya. http://www.neodiversity.org/articles/neod3102.pdf or if that doesn't work then try http://www.neodiversity.org/latestarticles.html I asked about L. tenebrosa and got the answer that he puts tenebrosa and lobata etc as varieties of purpurata. I understand he'll be lumping those debatable epidendrums early next year. On a different subject I noticed 'Neodiversity' is an electronic publication that will send printed papers to libraries etc but who basically use electronic means to disseminate their articles...I thought someone one got in trouble for using an electronic publication to publish their work.... was it Braeme? or the kovachii mess? That a hard copy had to be made......? But what do I know. Maybe the few hard copies they send to whatever libraries they use is sufficent for the taxonomy gods. I could be completely misremembering. K Barrett |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
They're all cattleyas now
On Jul 26, 3:29 pm, "K Barrett" wrote:
On a different subject I noticed 'Neodiversity' is an electronic publication that will send printed papers to libraries etc but who basically use electronic means to disseminate their articles...I thought someone one got in trouble for using an electronic publication to publish their work.... was it Braeme? or the kovachii mess? That a hard copy had to be made......? I'd be interested to know whether this was the case. So long as it's peer reviewed, which the Neodiversity home page implies it is, there should be no problem with publishing manuscripts in an electronic journal. There does seem to be a bit of reluctance particularly amongst older scientists to see them on equal weighting as 'hard copy' journals in terms of impact and credibility. However, the fact that most of the larger journals are publishing online these days and libraries are starting to cut back on hard copies in favour of electronic access makes me think that the naysayers are simply unwilling to embrace new technology. Given the amount of taxonomic research being published in very low impact factor journals (many of these journals are little more than herbarium-based outlets for staff to publish their results) I'm not sure taxonomists can afford to be too picky. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
They're all cattleyas now
"Andrew" wrote in message
... On Jul 26, 3:29 pm, "K Barrett" wrote: On a different subject I noticed 'Neodiversity' is an electronic publication that will send printed papers to libraries etc but who basically use electronic means to disseminate their articles...I thought someone one got in trouble for using an electronic publication to publish their work.... was it Braeme? or the kovachii mess? That a hard copy had to be made......? I'd be interested to know whether this was the case. So long as it's peer reviewed, which the Neodiversity home page implies it is, there should be no problem with publishing manuscripts in an electronic journal. There does seem to be a bit of reluctance particularly amongst older scientists to see them on equal weighting as 'hard copy' journals in terms of impact and credibility. However, the fact that most of the larger journals are publishing online these days and libraries are starting to cut back on hard copies in favour of electronic access makes me think that the naysayers are simply unwilling to embrace new technology. Given the amount of taxonomic research being published in very low impact factor journals (many of these journals are little more than herbarium-based outlets for staff to publish their results) I'm not sure taxonomists can afford to be too picky. I think you're right Andrew. K |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
They didn listen, will they do so now? | Australia | |||
Cattleyas for sale Sydney Australia | Orchids | |||
Standard Cattleyas and Better Species | Orchids | |||
Source for the following cattleyas and laelias... | Orchids | |||
Cattleyas - by newbie | Orchids |