[Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names

Frank T. Krell Frank.Krell at dmns.org
Sat Dec 24 10:09:09 CST 2016


But any work of art could be reproduced by another person. Very good forgeries aren't rare. The creativity is mainly in the original creation of a work, but sometimes even in the creation of the forgerie.
On the other hand, a good description of a new species by the most experienced expert of a group (text and figures) is not easily reproduced by a less experienced person from scratch.
While your arguments serve our common purpose - we publish in order to make things publicly available - I very much disagree that creativity is not involved in the creation of descriptive taxonomic work.
I wonder whether the lawyers of great photographers, or of National Geographic or GEO, for that purpose, would agree that the photographs of their clients are not copyrightable. "that does not show relevant variety compared with other photos" is not a clear criterion. I would humbly claim that some of my descriptions do show relevant variety compared with other description out there. I am not convinced by your arguments. But please try your ways. It is probably risky, but worth trying.

Cheers

Frank


Dr Frank T. Krell
Senior Curator of Entomology, Editor-in-Chief
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/museum-scientists/frank-krell
lab page: http://www.dmns.org/krell-lab

The Denver Museum of Nature & Science salutes the citizens of metro Denver for helping fund arts, culture and science through their support of the Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (SCFD). 




-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Donat Agosti
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2016 6:08 AM
To: Roderic Page <Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk>; Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; David Patterson <patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names

This is not correct. Yours not, but ours yes. We have a first test in our favor.
https://www.rechtsprechung.gerichte-bs.ch/cgi-bin/nph-omniscgi.exe?OmnisPlatform=WINDOWS&WebServerUrl=www.rechtsprechung.gerichte-bs.ch&WebServerScript=/cgi-bin/nph-omniscgi.exe&OmnisLibrary=JURISWEB&OmnisClass=rtFindinfoWebHtmlService&OmnisServer=JURISWEB,7000&Parametername=WEB&Schema=BS_FI_WEB&Source=&Aufruf=getMarkupDocument&cSprache=DE&nF30_KEY=53858&W10_KEY=113405&nTrefferzeile=1&Template=search_result_document.html<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rechtsprechung.gerichte-bs.ch%2Fcgi-bin%2Fnph-omniscgi.exe%3FOmnisPlatform%3DWINDOWS%26WebServerUrl%3Dwww.rechtsprechung.gerichte-bs.ch%26WebServerScript%3D%2Fcgi-bin%2Fnph-omniscgi.exe%26OmnisLibrary%3DJURISWEB%26OmnisClass%3DrtFindinfoWebHtmlService%26OmnisServer%3DJURISWEB%2C7000%26Parametername%3DWEB%26Schema%3DBS_FI_WEB%26Source%3D%26Aufruf%3DgetMarkupDocument%26cSprache%3DDE%26nF30_KEY%3D53858%26W10_KEY%3D113405%26nTrefferzeile%3D1%26Template%3Dsearch_result_document.html&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C624d26f718cc45d624e808d41c219631%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=Z3Gx1IKQcEK%2FhVF0ZIrhpkVdIM%2FBoBl0hK9wwcMrfVg%3D&reserved=0>

Content in short: A photo taken from a view site in Basel (Switzerland) is not copyrightable despite of technical rafinesse. "A photo that could be reproduced by others in the same or at least in a similar way and that does not show relevant variety compared with other photos is not copyrightable."

I'm sorry it does not refer to a bird or a plant, but the ruling is transferable to biological images. So, our thesis "has been tested in court" as you call it.

Donat


From: Roderic Page [mailto:Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk]
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2016 1:43 PM
To: Donat Agosti <agosti at amnh.org>; Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; David Patterson <patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names

Hi Donat,

That's pretty much my point. You have a hypothesis about copyright, it's untested. I chose to wait until it is tested. I judge the potential risks of a test case involving a commercials publisher to be high, so I won't be doing any testing myself just yet. Others may find the arguments compelling, get other legal opinions,  or have a different perception of the risks.

Regards,

Rod
Get Outlook for iOS<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fo0ukef&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C87ab25d5eb4c4e6c0e2a08d42bfa7308%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=vJvo3tMD9HiJx364Uiwed38dTOt9Zldo9C%2BcuYteQXU%3D&reserved=0>



On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 12:24 PM +0000, "Donat Agosti" <agosti at amnh.org<mailto:agosti at amnh.org>> wrote:
I think we should use the same tradition we use in science in other fields such as data policies: let’s make scientists scientific discoveries, reconstruct phylogenies, co-evolution; let’s get lawyers and law makers involved in copyright issues.

Everybody can believe or not in a phylogeny. But the one built by a scientists can be challenged, re-analyzed independently. An argument by a lawyer will be finally proofed right or not at a court – but it is much better than the reading of law by a biologist. This is what our paper is about (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/11/11/087015). So why not bring up legal experts that support your case rather than stay in the realm of gut feelings?

Donat


From: Roderic Page [mailto:Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk]
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2016 12:19 PM
To: Donat Agosti <agosti at amnh.org<mailto:agosti at amnh.org>>; Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
Cc: David Patterson <patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com<mailto:patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names

Hi Donat,

You've made arguments about copyright and images that you judge to be compelling, I'm not particularly convinced by them. This doesn't mean that I'm on the side of the "big players". Nor does this mean I'm against open access, quite the opposite. I too want open access to information and knowledge, and, like you, feel that I am making a contribution towards that goal.

Everybody is free to evaluate your arguments, decide for themselves whether the arguments are compelling, what the potential risks are, and act accordingly. I don't see how open discussion of this "blocks science", indeed you could argue that repeated discussion here, on the web, and in Twitter is helping expose more people to your approach.

Regards,

Rod

Get Outlook for iOS<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fo0ukef&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C08dfaa258bd6426db8fa08d42beed3a0%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=qleD8MhPO3MQqcdXw7IuQLqmMl81yeKPo9zb6MGcwws%3D&reserved=0>




On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 10:18 AM +0000, "Donat Agosti" <agosti at amnh.org<mailto:agosti at amnh.org>> wrote:

Rod



Again, you can have these suspicions and let it block the way we do science. This is your personal view which is not backed up by a legal background that you miss. There are a lot of signals from the legal world we get that are different from what you cite. You can continue playing along with the big players, eg CrossRef, Mendeley, Elsevier and accept that they do not really care about our admittedly small niche world. Rather, they build road blocks. We disagree and work towards a world we want, in fact need to operate efficiently. We did so at the begin of open access movement, and we are getting there now 15 years later.



Your argumentation could not be better done by the publishers you refer to: Find each one possible reason to block moving into an open world, instead of looking at what actually speaks for openness, which are much stronger. This is exactly what they do to block open access, whilst we spend billions of dollar to do science and create the content they so efficiently try to sell us again with a hilarious profit. Luckily our funders don't share your view and request open access as part of science process, from the White House to Welcome Trust to national funding agencies.



Is it better to suspect that  there are somewhere figures of morphological feature in our publications, or be able to have them all in a searchable archive, such as BHL on Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=biodiversity%20heritage%20library%20aedeagus<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.flickr.com%2Fsearch%2F%3Ftext%3Dbiodiversity%2520heritage%2520library%2520aedeagus&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C87ab25d5eb4c4e6c0e2a08d42bfa7308%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=hWX33Zw1bcSO2vwwecnk6L4FTNsF2T8fcK0L5xkNxDQ%3D&reserved=0>) or BLR at Zendo https://zenodo.org/communities/biosyslit/search?page=1&size=20&q=aedeagus&file_type=png<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzenodo.org%2Fcommunities%2Fbiosyslit%2Fsearch%3Fpage%3D1%26size%3D20%26q%3Daedeagus%26file_type%3Dpng&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C87ab25d5eb4c4e6c0e2a08d42bfa7308%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=nwp4rK6hS0Rwuge0vMF9LN6V1Iwq%2FQknGPZ4FgcWZHc%3D&reserved=0> , where you can get them immediately, with all the citations included? This is what we envision, need and allows to make our science a first class citizen.



Clearly, there will be discussion and conflicts. But I rather have conflicts but then being mutilated by what we consider a misguided feeling that this is the best we can do.



Donat





-----Original Message-----

From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Roderic Page

Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2016 10:37 AM

To: David Patterson

Cc: Taxa com

Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names



Hi Paddy,



I wish I shared your optimism that copyright on images was an easy thing to get around, but the comments on the paper  https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbiorxiv.org%2Fcontent%2Fearly%2F2016%2F11%2F11%2F087015&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=u3NDbxh50kVxwMS6nnigaZfXdUrK888eC2VnSKNkl0g%3D&reserved=0 and on Twitter    https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstorify.com%2Frdmpage%2Fconversation-with-charlesoppenh-myrmoteras-rdmpage&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=itRh0xYIqqPvKFQleFWpxlBv7to48U6s8TnvCx8O0sY%3D&reserved=0 suggest otherwise, or that at the very least it's debatable. I suspect that if you extracted images from a large commercial publisher, and they noticed and felt this was a potential threat to their business model, then academic arguments about copyright would not be much protection. If that's a risk Plazi wants to take, fine. Others may be a little more wary.



Regards,



Rod



Sent from my iPhone









On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 9:00 AM +0000, "David Patterson" <patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com<mailto:patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com>> wrote:



Hi guys



Copyright is for taxonomists approximately as big an issue as the sky falling on Henny Penny's head.



The Plazi group has the benefit of good copyright legal input and with that we were able to make a list of information that cannot be subject to copyright (Patterson, D. J., Egloff, W., Agosti, D., Eades, D., Franz, N., Hagedorn, G., Rees, J. A. and Remsen, D. P. 2014. Scientific names of organisms: attribution, rights, and licensing BMC Research Notes 7:79 doi:10.1186/1756-0500-7-79 9pp) Here > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbiorxiv.org%2Fcontent%2Fearly%2F2016%2F11%2F11%2F087015&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=u3NDbxh50kVxwMS6nnigaZfXdUrK888eC2VnSKNkl0g%3D&reserved=0, you will find the arguments extended to cover images.

Plazi is now contendly extracting treatments and images from taxonomic publications - example here https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftb.plazi.org%2FGgServer%2Fhtml%2FDD0FB428FFD2FFEAFF0609E34A3A4AC6&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=kRdQQHKNMGhZqzDuui1fQmKnRNdSM%2FBppKRHIepD74Y%3D&reserved=0

The point is that when a description of images follow a convention, then they cannot meet the legal requirements for a copyrightable work. There is no conflict with copyright to extract those elements of text that provide details of widely used traits, nor to extract the taxonomic treatment (and it follows that the nomenclatural acts can also be extracted), as can the images The concern is not copyright, but the business models of publishers that rely on charging folk for access to the information that they created, of institutions that argue they own content in the hope it will create a cash flow, and of individuals who confound effort with artistic creativity.

I am pleased to say things are going in a good direction and 2017 should be better than 2016.

David Patterson



On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Roderic Page <roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk>> wrote:

Hi Mike,



Yes, copyright is an issue, but BHL is negotiating with lots of museums, Herbaria, and societies to get post-1923 content into BHL (e.g., the journal Zoologica https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbiostor.org%2Fissn%2F0044-507X%2Fyear%2F1973&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=u46ys946I7UWqAJ6FAYiveFbjzvT7IW%2FcbduSpmH8iM%3D&reserved=0 )



Sadly Russia seems to be a black hole in terms of online availability of literature and specimens. I guess for BHL it would be a case of figuring out who could grant them permission to scan the relevant literature. The thing about "specialist interest" is that I think it's easy to underestimate the potential interest. Once content is online all sorts of things can happen, such as extracting images, exploring font styles, automatic translation training, etc.



BHL would be receptive to requests for scanning, especially if some of the initial work had been done figuring out who can give the OK to scan.



Regards ,



Rod



Get Outlook for iOS



_____________________________

From: Michael Wilson <wilsomichael at gmail.com<mailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com<mailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com%3cmailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com>>>

Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 12:00 pm

Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names

To: Roderic Page <roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk%3cmailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk>>>





Hi Rod



Thanks for the reply. I shall give your BioNames a try.



As for gaps in BHL, as you have said before it is the copyright gap that might be most significant. What appears to be happening though is that groups of taxonomists are scanning certain keys, and sometime rare literature, and making it available to each other in various ways. Examples are Russian works from the 60's which are barely available in the west. I may have the only copy in the UK of a Russian work on Auchenorrhyncha from 1966 of around 250 pages in which a lot of species are described (line drawings and Russian text). It would be good if such works can be more widely available- but would be of limited and specialist interest!



Best wishes



Mike



On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Roderic Page <roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk%3cmailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk>>> wrote:

Hi Mike,



The results are entirely based on what has been scanned by BHL https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbiodiversitylibrary.org&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=PrBJi%2B2D%2FygRNfGtgX42gszmqGIUHCTHxF3RU1r1c1w%3D&reserved=0  and processed by BioStor. BHL has lots of gaps, hence the results will, be incomplete. Another limitations that the OCR used to extract text from the page images may fail to correctly interpret the words in a page, missing some taxonomic names. It's a tool for discovery.



If you want more coverage, especially more recent papers, then my other literature project BioNames may help, e.g.http://bionames.org/timeline/Animalia/Arthropoda/Insecta/Hemiptera/Homoptera/Auchenorrhyncha/Cicadelloidea



If anyone working at a museum or involved in a scientific society is interested in helping fill in the gaps in BHL then agreeing to have your in-house journal, society publication, etc. scanned would be a very useful, contribution.



Sorry if I'm didn't make the limitations of the timeline tool clear.



Regards,



Rod



Get Outlook for iOS



_____________________________

From: Michael Wilson <wilsomichael at gmail.com<mailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com<mailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com%3cmailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com>>>

Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 8:47 am

Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New feature in BioStor - BHL timelines for Taxonomic names

To: Roderic Page <roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk%3cmailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk>>>







Hi Rod



That looks interesting. I just tried Cicadellinae and the results were variable- but far from complete and nothing after 2010- yet at least 20 papers on new species of this leafhopper subfamily have been published.



Best wishes



Mike Wilson

National Museum of Wales



On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Roderic Page <roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk%3cmailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk>>> wrote:

Dear All,



I've added a feature to BioStor that readers of this list might find useful. If you go tohttp://biostor.org/timeline.php and enter a taxonomic name, BioStor will search BHL for that and and return a list of BHL pages and BioStor articles containing that name, and a chart showing the occurrence of the name overtime. For example seehttp://biostor.org/timeline.php?q=Roncus



For some background see https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fiphylo.blogspot.co.uk%2F2016%2F12%2Ftaxonomic-name-timelines-for-bhl.html&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=HHoiAPKDHm07Pxru4f2hcunJT%2BDcJQqSLj0Y4QPxd0U%3D&reserved=0



Regards,



Rod





Get Outlook for iOS



_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List

Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu%3cmailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=3YPVTgwF6niDMA2T%2BIYe3cgIyKnsRLOerPeYWBQtv8c%3D&reserved=0

The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=0dUZz7j8GM%2FoTxL3V60YM%2F36q%2F%2B2IPxX4anELlgcmME%3D&reserved=0



Injecting Intellectual Liquidity for 29 years.













_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List

Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=3YPVTgwF6niDMA2T%2BIYe3cgIyKnsRLOerPeYWBQtv8c%3D&reserved=0

The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=0dUZz7j8GM%2FoTxL3V60YM%2F36q%2F%2B2IPxX4anELlgcmME%3D&reserved=0



Injecting Intellectual Liquidity for 29 years.







--

David J. Patterson

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List

Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=3YPVTgwF6niDMA2T%2BIYe3cgIyKnsRLOerPeYWBQtv8c%3D&reserved=0

The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C725ad00eeaf04d11b09e08d42be07724%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1&sdata=0dUZz7j8GM%2FoTxL3V60YM%2F36q%2F%2B2IPxX4anELlgcmME%3D&reserved=0



Injecting Intellectual Liquidity for 29 years.

</mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu</mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</mailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com</wilsomichael at gmail.com</mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</mailto:roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</mailto:wilsomichael at gmail.com</wilsomichael at gmail.com</roderic.page at glasgow.ac.uk</patterson.david.joseph at gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

Injecting Intellectual Liquidity for 29 years.


More information about the Taxacom mailing list