[Taxacom] How good is peer review at a lot of PRINO journals ...
Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman
viper007 at live.com.au
Fri Oct 4 17:36:34 CDT 2013
I know this as well John.
You see many crap papers in very upmarket j(credible?) ournals and the reverse as well.
I think it is time people looked at the science within rather than place of publication.
My own view is that place of publications is not as important as it was a few years back, noting that inevitably most papers are reduced to same format pdf's these days anyway.
All the best
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
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 06:36:27 +1300
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] How good is peer review at a lot of PRINO journals ...
From: calabar.john at gmail.com
To: viper007 at live.com.au
This shows what we already know - that the quality of a paper is only as good as the quality of the science within, and for that we must judge for ourselves case by case. Open access journals are not alone in having the problems described (that may have been mentioned).
Grehan
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman <viper007 at live.com.au> wrote:
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.
_______________________________________________
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