[Taxacom] How good is peer review at a lot of PRINO journals ...
Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman
viper007 at live.com.au
Fri Oct 4 06:45:05 CDT 2013
Dear all, I thought this may interest some of you in terms of the ethics of publications.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
Snakebustersâ - Australia's best reptilesâ
The only hands-on reptilesâ shows that lets people hold the animalsâ.
Reptile partiesâ, events, courses
Phones: 9812 3322
0412 777 211
> From: j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk
> To: xelaalex at cox.net; rjensen at saintmarys.edu
> Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:39:11 +0000
> CC: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Biodiversity questions: Classifications
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> I completely agree with you.
>
> If not the age of the group, then how about standardising it as a theoretical average number of generations per species, or some sort of index of hypothetical generation time, or index of generation time x genetic plasticity, or generation time x genetic plasticity + perceived rate of extinction, or . . . .
>
> My brain hurts.
>
> John
>
> John Noyes
> Scientific Associate
> Department of Life Sciences
> Natural History Museum
> Cromwell Road
> South Kensington
> London SW7 5BD
> UK
> jsn at nhm.ac.uk
> Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
> Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229
>
> Universal Chalcidoidea Database (everything you wanted to know about chalcidoids and more):
> www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Thompson
> Sent: 03 October 2013 19:04
> To: Richard Jensen
> Cc: TAXACOM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Biodiversity questions: Classifications
>
> Sorry, Dick,
>
> Yes, for different questions, we as scientists may use different measures, etc.
>
> HOWEVER, it the case of your example, age-based ranked groups are also useful. For CURRENT biodiversity one would declare that family x with 999 surviving species is a highly successful clade, where as family z with only a single surviving species is NOT.
>
>
> Real example, horse-shoe crabs versus insects!
>
> Oh, well ...
>
> From: Richard Jensen
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 12:28 PM
> To: Chris Thompson
> Cc: muscapaul ; TAXACOM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Biodiversity questions: Classifications
>
> Could it be that the apparent discrepancy in biodiversity, as we perceive it, is that family Z has had just as many speciation events as family X, but has experienced extremely high rates of extinction? If so, then knowing the age tells us nothing about biodiversity - the two clades, one with 999 surviving species, and one with 1 surviving species, could be the same age.
>
>
> Dick J
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Chris Thompson <xelaalex at cox.net> wrote:
>
> PAUL:
>
> The scientific question that we begin with was about biodiversity.
>
> And Hennig said to answer those kinds of questions, then groups based on
> time are the best.
>
> So, under the Hennig system, one could say that family X which now contains
> 999 species is more biodiversity, has more speciation, etc., than family Z
> which now contains only 1 species. BECAUSE the contents (species) of each
> family represents a clade that has evolved over the SAME time period.
>
> But as I indicated in my Diptera example, comparison of the number of
> species in Limoniidae versus Inbiomyiidae does not tell you anything about
> biodiversity, speciation, etc. because those groups are not equivalent, not
> comparable, etc.
>
> Oh, well ...
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: muscapaul
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 10:27 AM
> To: TAXACOM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Biodiversity questions: Classifications
>
> Just out of interest: If actual age would (should?) be playing a role,
> where do we then account for differences between taxa with highly divergent
> generation time, like drosophilids with perhaps more than 10 generations
> per year under favourable conditions and panthophthalmids which probably
> take multiple years to develop? And then I am just considering taxa within
> the same order where one might give rise to new taxa on a much shorter
> absolute time scale than the other.
>
> Paul
>
> On 3 October 2013 12:59, Chris Thompson <xelaalex at cox.net> wrote:
>
> > So, for example, in Diptera, we now recognize a family which is a clade of
> > some 10 thousand species and of some 200 million years old (Limoniidae)
> > and
> > another family of less than a dozen species and probably less than 5
> > million
> > years old (Inbiomyiidae).
>
> ...
> >
> > So, if one wants to derived scientific hypotheses from classifications,
> > one
> > must go back to clades and their age.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom
> your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Richard Jensen, Professor
>
> Department of Biology
>
> Saint Mary's College
>
> Notre Dame, IN 46556
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list