[Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?

Robin Leech releech at telus.net
Sun Jan 31 09:25:06 CST 2010


Nope! 23(b) was removed about 1970 or so.
Robin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mivie at montana.edu>
To: "Stephen Thorpe" <s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz>
Cc: <mesibov at southcom.com.au>; <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; 
<taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?


Hmmm, if everyone simply refused to use any Makhan names in validly
published papers for 50 years, wouldn't they just go away?

In the tradition I was raised in it is called shunning.

Mike Ivie


> True, but the only problem is that some would advocate completely ignoring
> the publications of what might be deemed to be a "rogue taxonomist", with
> two potentially bad results:
> (1) renaming taxa that have already been validly named by "rogue
> taxonomists" ; and
> (2) publishing the same scientific content again as if it were their own
> (plagiarism), in the unlikely but nonzero event that the "rogue
> taxonomist" can actually come up with a good idea now and again ...
> For example: http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wollumbinia
> Here, Wells correctly identified a new genus and (probably) validly named
> it, but his work was ignored ...
> Of course, we can and should ignore bad classifications if they are
> proposed, so we don't have to adopt anybody's taxonomy, "rogue" or not,
> but this is a different issue ...
>
> S
>
> ________________________________
> From: Matthew.Graham at unlv.edu [Matthew.Graham at unlv.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, 31 January 2010 6:21 p.m.
> To: Stephen Thorpe
> Cc: Frank.Krell at dmns.org; mesibov at southcom.com.au;
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?
>
> All,
>
> I agree that the ICZN has some loopholes, but since when did we stop
> treating taxonomies as hypotheses and start letting the code dictate our
> opinions about the classification of our beloved organisms for us?  It
> seems like most taxonomic groups are infected with a few bad taxonomists,
> but it is up to us, the readers of these papers, to ultimately decide
> which classification scheme to use. we are not forced to use whatever
> takes precedence according to the code.
>
> There is the well known debate over renaming many ranid frogs, and folks
> are publishing using both old and new taxonomies.  Some like using 'Rana',
> while others prefer the recent changes and use 'Lithobates'.  Both are
> correct, but eventually I expect that the majority of herpetologists will
> be using one name, while the other name gradually fades away or new
> research provides another taxonomic hypothesis.  (Of course this ranid
> example is more complicated than that, but it illustrates the point)
>
> So who cares if rogue taxonomists are publishing in rogue journals, for it
> is up to the scientific community to decide to accept or reject their
> taxonomic hypotheses.. the ultimate peer-review system.
>
> Just my thoughts.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> Matthew R. Graham
> PhD Candidate
> School of Life Sciences
> University of Nevada Las Vegas
> 4505 South Maryland Parkway
> Las Vegas, NV 89154-4004
>
>
>
> From:   Stephen Thorpe <s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz>
> To:     "Frank.Krell at dmns.org" <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>,
> "mesibov at southcom.com.au" <mesibov at southcom.com.au>,
> "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Date:   01/30/2010 09:11 PM
> Subject:        Re: [Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?
> Sent by:        taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> Yeah Frank, I will probably never see a hard copy of:
>
> Ratcliffe, B.; Krell, F.-T. (eds) 2010: Current advances in Scarabaeoidea
> research. ZooKeys, 34
>
> and who would bother buying a hard copy, when the pdfs are all free
> online?
>
> My attitude is that you ahve to assume hard copies exist in accordance
> with the Code, unless it is proven otherwise, but why bother trying to
> prove otherwise? Some cans of worms are best left unopened ...
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Frank.Krell at dmns.org [Frank.Krell at dmns.org]
> Sent: Sunday, 31 January 2010 6:00 p.m.
> To: Stephen Thorpe; mesibov at southcom.com.au; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?
>
> The current situation is even worse. Somebody can post a pdf online and
> claim that multiple copies have been produced and distributed. We have no
> means to verify such a claim.
> I guess most of us get their literatur electronically anyway. I believe
> that the pdf from "Entomological Research" that I downloaded yesterday has
> a hard copy counterpart. Would I ever check? No, because I consider
> Blackwell a reputable publisher. Have I verified that that new lucanid
> name is available. No, I just believe it, because I consider Blackwell a
> reputable publisher.
> I also consider PLOS a reputable publisher, but they have occasionally
> missed to produce paper copies. Low profile journals, such as Munis
> Entomology and Zoology or Calodema, claim to have hardcopies. I have seen
> a hardcopy of one volume of the former and know somebody who has seen a
> hardcopy of one volume of the latter. I don't know if they regularly
> produce a printrun.  If we find actual paper copies, we don't know whether
> they were produced 'print-on-demand' (which would not make names
> available) or originate from an initial printrun.
> The current situation, only recognizing works produced by means of an
> initial printrun, not allowing (= not efficiently regulating) e-only
> publications, provide all the opportunities to uniformed or unethical
> taxonomists already. Regulated e-only publications (e.g. with an archiving
> requirement) are unlikely to make the situation worse.
>
> Frank
>
> Dr Frank T. Krell
> Curator of Entomology
> Commissioner, International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature
> Chair, ICZN ZooBank Committee
> Department of Zoology
> Denver Museum of Nature & Science
> 2001 Colorado Boulevard
> Denver, CO 80205-5798 USA
> Frank.Krell at dmns.org
> Phone: (+1) (303) 370-8244
> Fax: (+1) (303) 331-6492
> http://www.dmns.org/science/curators/frank-krell
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
> [s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 9:13 PM
> To: Bob Mesibov; TAXACOM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?
>
> Bob, the bad news (or perhaps the good news) is that the situation to date
> is no better than your "nightmare scenario". According to the present
> Code, if I wanted to publish new taxa, all I have to do is print out
> multiple identical hard copies and make them "available" - no journal, no
> editor, no peer review, ...
>
> ________________________________________
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Bob Mesibov
> [mesibov at southcom.com.au]
> Sent: Sunday, 31 January 2010 4:55 p.m.
> To: TAXACOM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Do rogue taxonomists need rogue publishers?
>
> The answer to this thread's title question is 'No', if I read the proposed
> Code amendment properly.
>
> Self-publication has (in recent years, anyway) been seen as something less
> than ideal in taxonomy. There are plenty of journals that publish
> taxonomic papers. If you can't get into a reputable, peer-reviewed one,
> there are outlets like Calodema. In any case, a rogue taxonomist can seek
> and get the additional personal gravitas that comes with publication in a
> journal.
>
> The proposed amendments to the zoological Code will allow rogue
> taxonomists to self-publish hundreds of publications. All they need to do
> is register their new names and send PDFs of their work to all and sundry,
> including archiving organisations. Registration will not act as a filter
> here, and the archivers are not going to send the PDFs back saying 'We
> don't think this is good taxonomy'.
>
> Note that Makhan, at least, alerts other specialists to his papers, and
> similarly the e-only rogueof the future can simply email all relevant
> specialists with a list of the new names and a link to the PDF. Courteous,
> professional - and scary.
>
> I've read the proposed sections 8 and 9 amendments carefully looking for
> something that will prevent this from happening. I would be very grateful
> - really, really grateful - if someone could point to something in the
> Code that aims to avoid this scenario.
> --
> Dr Robert Mesibov
> Honorary Research Associate
> Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
> School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
> Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
> (03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
> Website: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/mesibov.html
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
>
>


_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these 
methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as: 
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here 





More information about the Taxacom mailing list