Taxacom Listserv Archives: Electronic publication of new taxa

[Joe Laferriere]

On Mon, 11 Mar 1996, Leonard Krishtalka wrote:

>         What I meant is quite simple and not at all what you thought.  Peer
> review and publication of articles in which new taxa are named and
> nomenclatural priorities established should not require print publication
> for these names and priorities to be considered valid.  Rather, the code
> should evolve to grant validity to names and priorities published
> electronically under the peer review system.

Thanx for the clarification. I'm afraid I disagree with this idea as well.
It is too difficult to define what constitutes a "peer." For a graduate
student, his/her peers would be the fellow students he/she has beer with
on Saturday night. The only way to implement your proposal would be to
issue a standardized list of acceptable journals (electronic or
otherwise), thus limiting the opportunity for researchers at poor
institutions unable to pay page charges or buy computers. Many workers in
developing countries are discovering new taxa on a regular basis, yet are
too poor to afford fancy equipment. Granted, the major institutions in
such countries tend to be well-equipped, but ones in the provinces are not.