[Taxacom] the zoological code and online publications

Fri Mar 21 20:24:09 CDT 2014

Vlad,

Regarding the ZooKeys example, then why bother preregistering ANY ZooKeys articles??

Regarding the BDJ example, you have just beautifully illustrated the exact problem! There are many kinds of nomenclatural acts, not just new names! Some are rather subtle, as in this case. The act here is a first reviser action giving precedence to one name over another, since both names were published in the same work, and there is no such thing as page priority in zoological nomenclature.

Cheers,

Stephen

________________________________
From: Vladimir Blagoderov <vblago at gmail.com>
To: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>; TAXACOM <Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> 
Sent: 
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] the zoological code and online publications

Steve, sorry, I can't see any problems with the links you provided. Zookeys example does not matter, since it is a printed publication. In BDJ there are no new available names, so there is nothing to register 

Cheers,

Vlad

--
Dr Vladimir Blagoderov, FLS
Department of Life Sciences
The Natural History Museum
Cromwell Road, London
SW7 5BD, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 207 942 6629 (office)
Tel: +44 (0) 207 942 6895 (SBIL)
Fax: +44 (0) 207 942 5229

e-mail:
vlab at nhm.ac.uk
vblago at gmail.com

Fungus Gnats Online:
http://www.sciaroidea.info/

On 21 March 2014 23:19, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:

No, Pensoft is almost but not quite perfect. Their main problem is not preregistering all articles on ZooBank, and thereby missing some nomenclatural acts, see, for example: 
>https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Breure_%26_Ablett,_2014 [Published yesterday]
>https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Dikow_%26_Leon,_2014
> 
>Stephen
>
>
> 
>
>
>From: Vladimir Blagoderov <vblago at gmail.com>
>To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> 
>Sent: 
>Subject: Re: [Taxacom] the zoological code and online publications
>
>
>No, Steven, you are wrong. Pensoft has done it properly always
>
>Cheers,
>
>Vlad
>
>
>--
>Dr Vladimir Blagoderov, FLS
>Department of Life Sciences
>The Natural History Museum
>Cromwell Road, London
>SW7 5BD, UK
>Tel: +44 (0) 207 942 6629 (office)
>Tel: +44 (0) 207 942 6895 (SBIL)
>Fax: +44 (0) 207 942 5229
>
>e-mail:
>vlab at nhm.ac.uk
>vblago at gmail.com
>
>Fungus Gnats Online:
>http://www.sciaroidea.info/
>
>
>On 21 March 2014 22:26, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> The situation is a bit more complicated. Really only Magnolia Press (not
>> surprisingly, perhaps) does e-publication properly all the time. It
>> preregisters all articles on ZooBank, and publishes only final versions
>> with the date of publication clearly stated in the articles themselves.
>> Other publishers make lots of mistakes, like thinking only articles with
>> new taxa need ZooBank pregistration, thereby forgetting about lectotype
>> designations, first-reviser actions, and other nomenclatural acts. The
>> level of chaos has increased following e-only publication.
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Donat Agosti <agosti at amnh.org>
>> To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>> Sent: Friday, 21 March 2014 8:26 PM
>> Subject: [Taxacom] the zoological code and online publications
>>
>>
>>
>> http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2014/03/17/the-zoological-code-and-online-publication/
>>
>> "The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) has
>> published a response<http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2014/f/zt03779p005.pdf>
>> to Dubois et al.<http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3735.1.1> who have
>> criticised the way online journals have interpreted the zoological Code<
>> http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/> (the rules you should
>> adhere to if you want to publish zoological species names correctly).
>> BioMed Central's response is also published<
>> http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2014/f/zt03779p008.pdf>, which expands
>> some of the points we made earlier<
>> http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2013/11/15/>. Nature also
>> commented here<http://www.nature.com/news/the-new-zoo-1.14200>. Thanks to
>> the 2012 Amendment<http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.219.3944> to the
>> Code, things have moved on and online journals are now 'available' for
>> nomenclature provided the species is registered in ZooBank<
>> http://zoobank.org/> and certain
>>  conditions<http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2012/f/z03450p008f.pdf> are
>> met. The crux of the problem seems to be a misinterpretation of the Code
>> for works published after 1999 and before 2012."
>>
>> (...)
>>
>> "BioMed Central wants to reassure authors who have entrusted their
>> manuscripts to us that in the majority of cases pre-2012, paper copies were
>> distributed and the rules adhered to. For cases where it is not clear if a
>> paper version was issued prior to the 2012 Amendment or cannot be found, we
>> will apply to the Commission and request they use their Plenary Power to
>> make available previously published 'unavailable' names. If only names were
>> available from the electronic version of record!"
>>
>> Donat
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org/
>>
>> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014. 
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org/
>>
>> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>>
>_______________________________________________
>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 at: http://taxacom.markmail.org/
>
>Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>
>
>