[Taxacom] two names online published - one new species
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Fri Jan 22 16:39:10 CST 2016
Well, use of the word "similarly", suggests that what applies to one applies equally to the other (in the context of Art. 9). Why else is that word there?
--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 23/1/16, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] two names online published - one new species
To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Received: Saturday, 23 January, 2016, 11:29 AM
He is NOT the Executive Secretary, he
is the Secretary-General! Two
different positions, no provision for employment is made for
the S-G.
You nitpick on everything anyone else says, try to keep up
on what you
say. Also, there does not seem to be any conflict of
interest
definition for the ICZN, so that would presumably not apply
anyway.
On 1/22/2016 3:20 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> "The Executive Secretary may be an employee of an
appropriate body, such as the International Trust for
Zoological Nomenclature"
>
> One might question the appropriateness of an Executive
Secretary being the owner of a commercial publishing house
whose published output is subject to regulation by the
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature!
>
> Stephen
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sat, 23/1/16, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] two names
online published - one new species
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Received: Saturday, 23 January, 2016,
10:49 AM
>
> Oops, looked at the wrong
> constitution, ITZN, not ICZN.
There is a
> Secretary-General possible, but the
position has no duties
> specified,
> and certainly is not head of
anything.
>
> "Article 9. Secretariat. The
Council may appoint an
> Executive Secretary
> for such a term and with such duties
as may be fixed in the
> Bylaws; a
> member of the Commission may be
appointed similarly as
> Secretary-General. The Executive
Secretary may be an
> employee of an
> appropriate body, such as the
International Trust for
> Zoological
> Nomenclature."
>
> Mike
>
> On 1/22/2016 2:32 PM, Michael A. Ivie
wrote:
> > Well, actually, if you consult
the Constitution and
> By-Laws of the
> > ICZN there is no such thing as a
Secretary-General, so
> a person with
> > that title cannot actually be
head of anything.
> Stephen, don't
> > believe everything you read on
the internet!.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On 1/22/2016 2:29 PM, Stephen
Thorpe wrote:
> >> Well, the article I linked to
states [quote]One of
> his top priorities
> >> in his new job would be to
ensure the
> commission’s long term
> >> viability[unquote]
> >>
> >> So, what does the president
do, then?
> >>
> >> It is really splitting hairs
to criticize my use of
> the vague term
> >> "head of"! It is near enough
to make my point.
> >>
> >> Stephen
> >>
> >>
--------------------------------------------
> >> On Sat, 23/1/16, Michael A.
Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Subject: Re:
[Taxacom] two names
> online published - one new species
> >> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> Received:
Saturday, 23 January,
> 2016, 10:10 AM
> >> Isn't
the head of the ICZN
> a
> >> President?
Did someone
> change the By-Laws?
> >> On
1/22/2016 2:03 PM,
> Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> >> > Rich,
> >> >
> >> > I'm
going to have to reply to
> some of your comments
> >> individually.
Firstly:
> >> >
> >> >>
Finally, can you
> elaborate on what you mean by this
> >> statement:
> >> >>
"BTW, congrats to Z.-Q.
> Zhang on his recent
> >> appointment
as head of the ICZN"
> >> >> ?
> >> > This is
what I mean:
> >> http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/about/news/snippets/researcher-in-nz-first
> >> >
> >> > Looks
like I do know
> something that you don't! :)
> >> >
> >> >
Stephen
> >> >
> >> >
> --------------------------------------------
> >> > On Sat,
23/1/16, Richard Pyle
> <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Subject:
RE:
> [Taxacom] two names
> >> online
published - one new
> species
> >> > To:
> "'Stephen Thorpe'" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
> >> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> >> "'engel'"
<msengel at ku.edu>,
> >> "'Doug
Yanega'" <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> >> > Received:
> Saturday, 23 January, 2016,
> >> 9:55 AM
> >> >
> >> > Hi
Stephen,
> >> >
> >> > Let
me
> clarify... I scale the
> >> > magnitude
of
> the issue using a
> >> baseline of
paper-based
> >> > publications
> and/or the situation as
> >> it existed
prior to the
> >> > amendment
> for electronic
> >> publication.
I often see
> lots of
> >> > frantic
> arm-waving and other forms of
> >> virtual
panic about
> >> > one
crisis
> or another related to
> >> electronic
publication.
> >> > To
be sure,
> there are some new
> >> problems
that have been
> >> > introduced
> with the Amendment, and
> >> CERTAINLY
the Amendment
> >> > did
not
> solve all of the problems that
> >> existed
before it
> >> > (nor
could
> it have). As Doug has
> >> already
alluded to, the
> >> > Amendment
> represents a compromise
> >> between many
different
> >> > possible
> approaches, and ultimately
> >> reflects the
best
> >> > consensus
of
> the community at the
> >> time.
> >> >
> >> > One
thing
> the Amendment has done is
> >> shine a
> >> > spotlight
on
> problems that have
> >> existed for
a long time, but
> >> > which
people
> scarcely noticed
> >> before.
That they went
> >> > unnoticed
> before doesn't mean that
> >> they were
any less
> >> > serious
> before; only that many of us
> >> were
blissfully
> >> > ignorant.
> One might argue that
> >> an
"ignorance is
> >> > bliss"
> approach is warranted, but it
> >> seems
incompatible
> >> > to
basic
> scientific principles that we
> >> taxonomists
would
> >> > generally
> like to adhere to.
> >> >
> >> > So,
here are
> some examples of things
> >> that are
> >> > helpful:
> >> > -
Specific
> observations about how
> >> > the
existing
> rules fail in particular
> >> circumstances
> >> > -
> Constructive suggestions on how the
> >> next
> >> > edition
of
> the Code can be improved to
> >> minimize
such
> >> > failures
> >> >
> >> > And
here are
> some
> >> > examples
of
> things that are not
> >> helpful:
> >> > -
> >> > Frantic
> arm-waving and hyperbolic
> >> exclamations
about how the
> >> > nomenclatural
> sky is falling.
> >> > -
> >> > Misrepresentation
> of problems with the
> >> Code that
have been
> >> > illuminated
> by the Amendment for
> >> electronic
publication as
> >> > though
they
> were *caused* by the
> >> Amendment
(when in most
> >> > cases
they
> were, in fact, extant prior
> >> to the
Amendment, and
> >> > in
many
> cases at least mitigated to
> >> some extent
by the
> >> > Amendment).
> >> > -
> Representing personal
> >> > interpretations
> about how the Code
> >> "should"
be,
> >> > with
what is
> actually written in the
> >> Code.
> >> > -
> >> > Utterly
> bogus (and, frankly,
> >> childish)
accusations that
> >> > the
> Amendment was somehow nefariously
> >> influenced
by the
> >> > needs/demands
> of the for-profit
> >> publishing
community.
> >> >
> >> > Note:
> Stephen, I am not
> >> > necessarily
> accusing you of all these
> >> things; but
I've
> >> > seen
> examples of them fly through
> >> Taxacom and
other venues
> >> > on
a regular
> basis.
> >> >
> >> > In
> >> > answer
to
> some of your specific
> >> questions:
every edit to
> >> > every
record
> in ZooBank is logged with
> >> information
on what
> >> > field
was
> changed, what the previous
> >> and new
values are, who
> >> > changed
> them, and exactly (to the
> >> nearest
millisecond, UTC
> >> > time)
when
> the change was made. So,
> >> for example,
if you
> >> > edited
> archive info into the Zoobank
> >> record for
Systematic
> >> > Entomology,
> there would be a record of
> >> the fact
that you
> >> > edited
it,
> and exactly when you edited
> >> it. Not all
of this
> >> > information
> is visible on the ZooBank
> >> website, but
as soon
> >> > as
we
> receive the next round of
> >> ZooBank
development funding,
> >> > much
of it
> will be added. In the
> >> meantime, I
am happy to
> >> > retrieve
and
> provide this information
> >> for any
field of any
> >> > record.
> >> >
> >> > Finally,
can
> you
> >> > elaborate
on
> what you mean by this
> >> statement:
> >> > "BTW,
> congrats to Z.-Q. Zhang on his
> >> > recent
> appointment as head of the
> >> ICZN"
> >> > ?
> >> >
> >> > Either
you
> >> > know
> something that I don't, or this
> >> serves as
one more
> >> > example
> reflecting the reliability of
> >> your
insights on the
> >> > ICZN
and its
> functions.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
and
> Aloha,
> >> > Rich
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Richard
L.
> >> > Pyle,
PhD
> >> > Database
> Coordinator for Natural
> >> > Sciences
|
> Associate Zoologist in
> >> Ichthyology
| Dive Safety
> >> > Officer
> >> > Department
> of Natural Sciences,
> >> > Bishop
> Museum, 1525 Bernice St.,
> >> Honolulu, HI
96817
> >> > Ph:
> (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
> >> email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> >> > http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/staff/pylerichard.html
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >
> -----Original
> >> > Message-----
> >> > >
From:
> Stephen Thorpe
> >> > [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
> >> > >
Sent:
> Friday, January 22, 2016
> >> 10:29 AM
> >> > >
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
> >> > 'engel';
> 'Doug Yanega';
> >> > >
> >> > deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> >> > >
> Subject: RE: [Taxacom] two names
> >> online
> >> > published
-
> one new species
> >> > >
> >> > >
The
> issue may not be "huge", but
> >> > I
think it
> is probably bigger than
> >> you
> >> > >
> >> > indicate.
> There can be problems in
> >> determining
"the
> >> > earliest
> date on which all
> >> > >
of the
> >> > requirements
> have been met". Adding to
> >> this problem
is
> >> > the
fact
> that
> >> > >
many
> publishers are
> >> > publishing
> print editions online ahead
> >> of actual
print
> >> > >
> (sometimes by months). We have
> >> already
> >> > seen
Frank
> Krell suggest, quite
> >> > >
> >> > erroneously
> in my view, that "March
> >> 2016" must
be
> >> > a
mistake on
> the
> >> > >
> Cretaceous Research
> >> > website.
In
> fact, it is no mistake!
> >> They have
published
> >> > >
their
> March 2016 print edition
> >> online
> >> > already,
but
> it presumably won't be
> >> > >
> >> > actually
> printed until March! One, I
> >> suppose only
fairly
> >> > minor
> problem,
> >> > >
> concerns the nominal
> >> > year
of
> publication for taxon names,
> >> which is
> >> > >
> frequently widely appended to the
> >> names
> >> > (i.e.,
Aus
> bus Author, YEAR). It is
> >> > >
now
> >> > very
hard to
> choose between one year
> >> and the next
(if online
> >> > versions
> >> > >
are
> published in one year, but
> >> > the
print
> version isn't actually
> >> printed
until the
> >> > >
> following year). Another problem
> >> is that
> >> > many
people
> have wasted a
> >> > >
> significant
> >> > amount
of
> time doing preregistrations
> >> on ZooBank
that were
> >> > in
> >> > >
fact
> pointless. They thought
> >> that
> >> > they
were
> validly publishing online
> >> first!
> >> > >
There
> are also issues relating to
> >> how easy
> >> > it
might be
> to make apparently
> >> > >
> >> > retroactive
> edits on ZooBank, which
> >> cannot be
(at least not
> >> > publicly)
> >> > >
> datestamped (for example,
> >> > what
would
> happen if I now edited
> >> archive
info
> >> > >
into
> the Zoobank record for
> >> Systematic
> >> > Entomology?)
> Regrettably, I think
> >> > >
that
> >> > in
the rush
> to push through a Zootaxa
> >> optimised
electronic
> >> > amendment,
> >> > >
the
> ICZN has created rather
> >> > a
confusing
> mess for many authors and
> >> > >
> >> > publishers
> to try to deal with. BTW,
> >> congrats to
Z.-Q. Zhang
> >> > on
his
> recent
> >> > >
> appointment as head of
> >> > the
ICZN (I
> would have thought that
> >> there was
> >> > >
rather
> a big COI involved there,
> >> but
> >> > apparently
> not...)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> Stephen
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > --------------------------------------------
> >> > >
On Fri,
> 22/1/16, Richard Pyle
> >> <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> Subject:
> >> > RE:
> [Taxacom] two names online
> >> published -
one new
> >> > species
> >> > >
> To: "'Stephen
> >> > Thorpe'"
> <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
> >> > >
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> >> > "'engel'"
> <msengel at ku.edu>,
> >> > "'Doug
> >> > >
> Yanega'"
> >> > <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> >> > >
> Received: Friday, 22
> >> January,
2016, 6:45
> >> > PM
> >> > >
> >> > >
> Well,
> >> > it's
> neither
> >> > >
> new, nor huge*.
> >> > But
it is a
> problem, and it was a
> >> problem
that was
> >> > >
> recognized prior to the
> >> publication
of
> >> > the
> Amendment, and one which
> >> the
> >> > >
> >> > Commissioners
> have discussed
> >> several
times.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> The
> >> > >
> fundamental question that
> >> we do not
have
> >> > a
definitive
> answer for yet
> >> (even
> >> > >
> >> > though
we
> have an over-abundance of
> >> opinions),
is how to
> >> > establish
> the
> >> > >
date of
> publication for
> >> > purposes
> of priority, when the
> >> following
dates are
> >> > >
> non-identical:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> 1) The date on which the
> >> > >
> publication was registered
> >> in
> >> > ZooBank.
> >> > >
> 2)
> >> > >
> >> > The
date of
> publication as stated in
> >> the ZooBank
record.
> >> > >
> 3) The date of publication
> >> as stated
in
> >> > the
> work itself.
> >> > >
> 4) The date on
> >> > which
the
> first
> >> > >
> electronic edition of
> >> > the
work was
> obtainable.
> >> > >
> 5) The date
> >> > on
which the
> ISSN or ISBN was
> >> added
to the ZooBank
> >> > record.
> >> > >
> 6) The date on which
> >> > >
> the Intended archive was
> >> added to
the
> >> > ZooBank
> record.
> >> > >
> 7) The date on which
> >> > a
revised
> version of the
> >> electronic
edition of the work
> >> > >
was
> obtainable (e.g.,
> >> containing
> >> > evidence
of
> registration).
> >> > >
> 8) The
> >> > >
> date on which paper copies
> >> were
> >> > obtainable.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > There
are
> other dates as well
> >> > >
> (e.g.,
> >> > the
date of
> publication as stated in
> >> the
paper edition of
> >> > the
work,
> >> > >
etc.),
> but I hope you get the
> >> > point
> that it's not a simple
> >> issue,
because there
> >> > >
are
> many possible dates
> >> associated
with
> >> > a
given
> work.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > So...
which
> is the date of
> >> > >
> >> > publication
> for purposes of
> >> priority?
Certainly, most
> >> > would
agree
> that it
> >> > >
cannot
> be prior to
> >> > #4
(assuming
> the above list is
> >> in
chronological
> >> > >
> sequence). Certainly,
> >> not
after #8
> >> > (provided
> the paper edition meets all
> >> > >
> >> > other
> criteria of the code for
> >> paper-based
> >> > publications).
> Most
> >> > >
> Commissioners I
> >> > have
> discussed this with agree that
> >> the
logical answer
> >> > is,
> >> > >
> generally "the earliest date
> >> > on
> which all of the requirements
> >> have been
> >> > >
> met". As #2 has
> >> no
> >> > bearing
on
> any article in the
> >> Code, we can
probably
> >> > >
ignore
> that one. But all
> >> the
others
> >> > are
in
> potential play. One could
> >> argue
> >> > >
> (pretty effectively, in
> >> fact), that
> >> > while
the
> Code requires
> >> electronic
works to
> >> > >
include
> the date of publication
> >> to be
> >> > stated
> within the work itself, there
> >> is no
> >> > >
> requirement that it be the
> >> *correct*
> >> > date
of
> publication. Indeed, if
> >> such a
> >> > >
> requirement was, in fact, part of
> >> the Code
> >> > (or
how the
> Code is
> >> interpreted),
> >> > >
> >> > stability
> would most likely suffer.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> Until there is clarity on
> >> this
> >> > >
> issue, either by
> >> Declaration,
Amendment,
> >> > formal
> statement, or ratified
> >> 5th
> >> > >
> >> > Edition
by
> the Commission, it seems to
> >> me
(and most others
> >> > I've
> discussed it
> >> > >
with),
> that the
> >> > trusty
"the
> earliest date on which all
> >> of the
> >> > requirements
> >> > >
have
> been met"
> >> > approach
> seems the most logical
> >> to use as a
guideline.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> Aloha,
> >> > >
> Rich
> >> > >
> >> > >
> *The reason it's not a
> >> > "huge"
> >> > >
> issue is that it
> >> > ultimately
> affects date of publication
> >> for
purposes of
> >> > priority;
> >> > >
and
> while there may be a few
> >> > cases
> where potentially
> >> competing
names
> >> > >
both
> fall within the "grey
> >> > zone",
there
> certainly aren't many.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> > -----Original
> >> > >
> Message-----
> >> > >
> >
> >> > From:
> Stephen Thorpe
> >> > >
> [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
> >> > >
> > Sent: Thursday,
> >> January 21,
2016
> >> > 11:53
> AM > To:
> >> > >
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
> >> > engel;
Doug
> Yanega > Cc:
> >> > >
deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> >> > >
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] two names
> >> online
> >> > >
> published - one new species
> >> >
>
> >> > Doug
(CC
> Rich), > >
> >> I think we
may have
> >> > >
just
> stumbled upon a huge
> >> problem:
> >> > "the
> ZooBank >
> >> registration
state both
> >> > >
the
> name of an electronic
> >> archive
> >> > intended
> to > preserve the
> >> work
and ..."
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> > I
> >> > have
> >> > >
> always assumed that the
> >> > publisher
> does this, once for
> >> each
journal?
> >> > >
> > Certainly Magnolia
> >> Press does
> >> > >
> it for Zootaxa (not
> >> surprisingly,
> >> > perhaps,
> since > the whole
> >> electronic
> >> > >
> amendment is arguably
> >> optimised
for
> >> > Zootaxa).
> How > many
> >> authors
think
> >> > >
to
> worry about the archive when
> >> > registering
> articles on
> >> >
ZooBank? Bugger
> >> > >
all!
> >> > >
> Looking at
> >> > some
random
> records on ZooBank, I'm
> >> now
> worried
> >> > that
a
> >> > >
large
> number of them fail
> >> this
> >> > requirement!
> I think we need
> >> > some
> >> > >
> clarification here (Rich?)
> >> >
>
> >> > Stephen
> > >
> >> > >
> >> > --------------------------------------------
> >> > >
> > On Fri, 22/1/16, Doug
> >> Yanega
<dyanega at ucr.edu>
> >> > >
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> > Subject:
> >> > >
> >> > Re:
> [Taxacom] two names online
> >> published -
one new
> >> > species
> > To:
> >> > >
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> >> > "engel"
> <msengel at ku.edu>
> >> > >
> Received:
> >> > >
Friday,
> 22 January,
> >> > 2016,
> >> > >
> 10:17 AM
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> > On
> >> > >
> >> > 1/21/16
1:03
> PM,
> >> > >
> > Stephen
> >> > Thorpe
> >> > >
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> > It is worth
> >> > >
> > noting
> >> > that
Michael
> Engel did
> >> > >
> preregister
> >> > his
article
> (twice
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> actually!) on ZooBank:
> >> > >
> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> > 18 October 2015
> >> http://zoobank.org/References/A6A94078-42E5-48B8-
> >> > >
> > B602-49DA7D0523F6
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> [Record not
> >> > publicly
> viewable]
> >> > >
> > >
> >> > >
> 13
> >> > >
> >
> >> > November
> 2015 http://zoobank.org/References/ADFE8605-38F3-45C6-
> >> > >
> > B686-5094367C9695
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> > > It would
> >> therefore
> >> > >
> > appear to be the
> >> fault of
the
> >> > journal
> (Cretaceous
> >> Research)
editorial
> >> > >
> team > that no
> >> ZooBank
registration
> >> > was
> indicated in the
> >> publication,
and
> >> > >
> very > unfortunate
> >> in
this case
> >> > since
> it the same taxon was
> >> apparently
> >> > >
> validly > described as
> >> new by
> >> > Pohl
> & Beutel shortly
> >> after!
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> > It is not just
> >> > this
one
> thing that
> >> > >
> causes the name
> >> > to
be
> unavailable.
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> There are *three*
> >> > >
> >> > >
> requirements under
> >> > >
> the present
> >> > ICZN,
and
> the Engel et al.
> >> online
paper > failed to
> >> > comply
with
> >> > >
*two*
> of them, not
> >> just
> >> > one.
> Note the following
> >> > (from
> >> > >
> >> > >
http://iczn.org/content/electronic-publication-made-available-
> >> > >
> amendment-
> >> > >
> >
> >> > code):
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
"
> The requirements for
> >> > >
> >> > >
> electronic publications are
> >> that
the work be
> >> > registered
> in ZooBank before
> >> > >
> it >
> >> > is
> published, that the work
> >> itself
state the date
> of
> >> > publication
> and
> >> > >
> contain > evidence
> >> > that
> registration has
> >> occurred,
and that the
> ZooBank
> >> > >
> registration >
> >> state
both the name
> >> > of
an
> electronic archive
> >> intended to
> >> > >
> preserve the work > and
> >> the ISSN or
> >> > ISBN
> > >
> >> associated
with the work."
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> > The
> >> > online
> version of this
> >> > >
> > work
> >> > fulfills
the
> first of these
> >> > >
> >> > criteria,
> but neither of the
> >> latter two.
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> >
> >> > Sincerely,
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> > --
> >> > >
> >
> >> > Doug
> Yanega Dept.
> >> > >
> > of
> >> > Entomology
> >> > >
> >>
Entomology
> >> > Research
> Museum Univ.
> >> of
California, >
> Riverside,
> >> > CA
> >> > >
> > 92521-0314
> >> >
skype:
> >> > >
> dyanega
> >> > >
> > phone: (951)
> >> 827-4315
> >> > >
> (disclaimer: opinions
> >> are
mine, not
> >> > UCR's)
> >> > >
>
> >> > http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
> >> > >
> >
> >> "There
are
> >> > some
> >> > >
> enterprises
> >> > >
> > in which a
> >> careful
> >> > >
> disorderliness
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> >> >
is the
> true method" - Herman
> >> Melville,
> >> > Moby
Dick,
> Chap. 82 >
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > >
> > Taxacom Mailing
> >> List
> >> > >
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > >
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> > >
> > The Taxacom
> >> Archive back
to 1992
> >> > may
> be searched at:
> >> > >
> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >> > >
> >
> >> > >
> >
> >> > Celebrating
> 29
> >> > >
> years of
> >> > >
> > Taxacom in
> >> 2016.
> >> >
> _______________________________________________
> >> > Taxacom
Mailing List
> >> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> > The
Taxacom Archive back to
> 1992 may be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >> >
> >> >
Celebrating 29 years of
> Taxacom in 2016.
> >> --
> >> __________________________________________________
> >>
Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D.,
> F.R.E.S.
> >> US
Post Office Address:
> >> Montana
Entomology Collection
> >> Marsh Labs,
Room 50
> >> 1911 West
Lincoln Street
> >> Montana
State University
> >> Bozeman, MT
59717
> >> USA
> >> UPS,
FedEx, DHL Address:
> >> Montana
Entomology Collection
> >> Marsh Labs,
Room 50
> >> 1911 West
Lincoln Street
> >> Montana
State University
> >> Bozeman, MT
59718
> >> USA
> >>
(406) 994-4610
> (voice)
> >> (406)
994-6029 (FAX)
> >> mivie at montana.edu
> >>
>
_______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom
Mailing List
> >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> The Taxacom
Archive back to 1992
> may be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
Celebrating 29 years of
> Taxacom in 2016.
> >>
> >> .
> >>
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________
>
> Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
>
> US Post Office Address:
> Montana Entomology Collection
> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> 1911 West Lincoln Street
> Montana State University
> Bozeman, MT 59717
> USA
>
> UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
> Montana Entomology Collection
> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> 1911 West Lincoln Street
> Montana State University
> Bozeman, MT 59718
> USA
>
>
> (406) 994-4610 (voice)
> (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
> mivie at montana.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 29 years of Taxacom in
2016.
>
> .
>
--
__________________________________________________
Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
US Post Office Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA
UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59718
USA
(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list