GenBank and vouchers

[Jim Whitfield]

In response to Tim Lowrey's last message (Thanks for the list of
references by the way- I had seen only 2 of them myself...):

>
>  I believe that Genbank needs to institute a major education program about
>what voucher specimens are and why they are needed. Then they better start
>requiring them before acceptance of sequence data. Perhaps the NSF and
>NIH(where appropriate) should require proper vouchering protocol in their
>grant requirements for the biological sciences.
>Tim Lowrey

I personally feel that JOURNALS  have a greater role to play here
than GenBank, although maybe the group at GenBank may want to take
you up on it also.   It would be great if editorial policies would
REQUIRE statements about voucher deposition locations (and also
collection locality data) in addition to requiring GenBank accession
numbers.   I think NSF already encourages such statements (along with
documentation of intention to get proper collection permits), but
usually enforcement is really up to the review panels.
        In other words, I would prefer if the original molecular
systematics paper had all the information you need in it from the
start. Unfortunately, this is even sometimes discouraged in journals
where space is at a premium.  False economy in my opinion.
--
James B. Whitfield
Associate Professor
Department of Entomology
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701
tel. 501-575-2482
FAX 501-575-2452
email jwhitfie at comp.uark.edu