What about entomological atlases?

Of these three options I don't like any of them

For this purpose, the discussion is open, so that there is an opportunity to express a point of view that does not coincide with any of the presented options.

With imagesand - it is clearer. For both specialists and non specialists
try to describe the genitals of two closely related species in words

Or at first I didn't really understand the details of the structure of the hind basins in Chlaeniini and Harpalini (the back edge falls vertically - it lies on the same level) - until I looked at exactly certain specimens, I couldn't fully understand them

In general, as in any business, it is necessary here without fanaticism - the text and illustrations should complement each other.

This post was edited by Bad Den - 14.04.2008 16: 34

 

Or at first I didn't really understand the details of the structure of the hind basins in Chlaeniini and Harpalini (the back edge falls vertically - it lies on the same level) - until I looked at exactly certain specimens, I couldn't fully understand them

I still pass this place ("The outer (outer) part of the back basins....) more intuitive than exactly imagining what it should look like. As always, the specialist knows this for sure, but he doesn't even need tables, and who really needs to "guess".

Someone said a long time ago: "Defining tables are written by those who do not need them for those who will not be able to use them."

This post was edited by amara - 14.04.2008 17: 17

I still pass this place ("The outer (outer) part of the back basins....) more intuitive than exactly imagining what it should look like.

By the way, this is what this attribute looks like (I once posted a photo in one of the topics, but I already forgot where)

If we publish a systematic article, or a determinant, we can't do without it. If we make another volume of the Palearctic catalog, or make another annotated list of the N - region, there is no need for pictures.

If we make another volume of the Palearctic catalog, or make another annotated list of the N - region, there is no need for pictures.

With one "but". After all, we are talking, as I understand it, about any illustrations. A map of the N - region with marks of points of finds to the annotated list does not hurt.

You never know how someone decides to describe a particular feature.. But nothing gives a better idea than drawing or photography.

You never know how someone decides to describe a particular feature.. But nothing gives a better idea than drawing or photography.

It may be weak in mind, it may be lame in abstraction, but it is difficult to immediately imagine what you have never seen, and even more so in a comparative ratio. But where to get it, this comparative material for beginners!?
In a word, it is difficult for a teapot without illustrations.

I'm all for entomological PR!

In the concept of illustration, I put ANY graphic components - drawings of body parts or full habit, photos, maps, and so on.

What does it mean? And graphs, diagrams, and other mustachioed boxes, too? After all, such illustrations account for most of the drawings in modern articles. For me, a biological article with only such drawings looks much more depressing than without drawings at all.

That's why I started this survey - in many of our determinants, text information clearly dominates graphic information. Very often, this practice also applies to articles. Many faunal works are given without maps of the area. Publishing an atlas by group, with good printing, is more of a rarity than a rule. And if you ask, it turns out all FOR. So what's stopping you from including more illustrations in your work? Although much probably depends on the publication. I recently looked at a collection of Crimean abstracts from the conference, so it would be better if the photos were not given at all. Otherwise, the print quality is poor .

So what's stopping you from including more illustrations in your work?

Issue price. This applies to high-quality printing, of course. You can publish a well-illustrated atlas of a little-known group, but who will buy it? How can the invested funds be "recaptured"in this case?

In general, I am in favor of illustrated determinants - when it is clearly clear which attribute and where to look for a photo, then the definition becomes fast and clear. Descriptions often only contain errors, even when you are completely sure of the definition.. it seems that there can be no other option, and the result is not correct..

That's what I mean. Traditionally, the qualifiers include drawings of only those features that seem complex to the taxonomist. However, a lot of things are skipped that seem simple, but in practice it turns out to be incomprehensible. A specialist often writes the determinant "by itself", so things that seem obvious to him can cause difficulties for another. I had such a case, I used two of our determinants and came to the conclusion that the instance I was defining belongs to the nth type. According to the description, a lot of things fit, and what didn't fit I considered possible variability. What was my surprise when I looked at the photo of habitus in the Fauna of Czechoslovakia and realized that I didn't even get close. This is how a simple photo can help you understand the error.

This is a philosophy where works are analyzed, reviewed and decoded for 100 years. In entomology, we need simplification so that everyone can understand everything.
The problem of expensive book printing is very easily solved with the current development of information technology.. The identifier in the electronic version can now be made at least in word..what to say.. yes even in paint
There is some other problem - the protection of such works, because it is not a problem to crack almost any program and then distribute it for free. But then who does what for - if you create works for science, then you can distribute them for free, and if for commerce, then you can spend money on printing, but you still have to sell them.. Over there, Tuzov's books are still being bought, and they cost oh so much, but everyone takes a good job and no one complains

Recently, elector disks with qualifiers have been released. Very interesting databases. And most importantly, they are very informative and understandable. I've seen one like this in beetles and diurnal butterflies. Very convenient thing, if you do not take into account the fact that you constantly have to stare at the monitor

But then who does what for - if you create works for science, then you can distribute them for free

Oh, dear RippeR, I wish you were right. But life, unfortunately, shows that altruism is gradually disappearing from modern science. But, fortunately, not from the forum!

This is true, you can't get very far on altruism . Living in a hut and in an abundance of insects is not modern . It's a pity...

This is true, you can't get very far on altruism . Living in a hut and in an abundance of insects is not modern . It's a pity...

But at least sometimes to break away completely from the hustle and bustle of urbocloak.

I would generally offer help with creating qualifiers, and I really want to myself. But it's still a long time coming - I still need to finish my IT training, and then think about creating databases. And what can I say - we all can't create an atlas based on pigeons, take photos, group them, etc. But time will tell - maybe later there will be more time and incentive.

The topic name doesn't match the topic author's comment, so it's not clear how or what to vote for. Atlases are a type of printed product, always illustrated. In this acceptance, the essence of the survey seems to be clear: "How do you feel about atlases that contain a lot of photos and drawings?" But the following comment is completely confusing - "A large number of illustrations in entomological works..." The fact is that entomological works in most cases are not atlases. In general there is some confusion

If entomological works in general were meant, then it is impossible to give a monosyllabic answer. This depends on the specifics of the work (taxonomy, morphology, experimental, faunistics, catalog, etc.), on the complexity of the group or topic, and on the target audience that the publication is aimed at (schoolchildren, students, amateurs, a wide range of specialists, narrow specialists, etc.). In this case,you need to discuss each category of publications separately, how appropriate are these or other illustrations. It's different everywhere. Somewhere they are nafig not needed, and somewhere without them trouble

This post was edited by Salix - 05/07/2008 06: 26

ATLAS — a cartographic or pictorial book publication, the main material of which is maps (A. geographical, astronomical) or images that serve as a means of visual training or mastering various disciplines (A. anatomical, botanical, zoological, medical, technical, etc.).

This post was edited by Salix - 05/07/2008 05: 49

The topic name doesn't match the topic author's comment, so it's not clear how or what to vote for.

There is no confusion. The topic "Your attitude to entomological atlases" refers to the atlas as the pinnacle of an illustrative character. Voting and discussion are somewhat expanded. In other words, the problems of the need for drawings in entomological works in principle are discussed. I opened the topic for some reason - because there are not enough pictures in modern works, especially patronymic ones. And against this background, I came up with a not tricky idea - why are there so few of them? Because they are not needed, or for some other, possibly technical or mental reasons. In Western works, for example, there are more drawings. The topic is certainly not advanced, let's say right away . And there is no clear answer here and there can't be, but to look at the opinions, that's what's interesting. However, it turned out that everything is "for", and therefore it has been lying around for several weeks on the back of the forum. But thanks to the efforts of Salix'a, she was brought back to life. However, since most people are not particularly interested in the topic, I think it will soon return to the background .

This post was edited by Dormidont - 05/08/2008 00: 57

Dormidont, thank you for the harassment. But initially it wasn't obvious. And the topic is interesting, but precisely from the point of view of discussing all sorts of subtleties... And in such a global aspect, I don't even know what to say. Well, yes, a well-illustrated work is better than a poorly illustrated one, hardly anyone will argue with this

Indeed, there are more drawings and photos in imported magazines. Why is that? The reasons are both mental and technical

First, the requirements for the quality of works, which are much lower in Russian journals. Beyond the hill, more or less high-quality journals, even for taxonomic works, actually require (well, very, very strongly recommend) to illustrate the work of SEM, or just with high-quality photos. The same goes for classic contour drawings. The same high requirements apply to Results and Discussion. Whether you want it or not, you have to invent it, even if the work contains banal descriptions. Although banal descriptions in good magazines are very difficult to pass - it is advisable to either review or revise it, for that matter... All journals want to be cited so that the impact factor is as large as... salary and all that. Therefore, they try to raise the level and quality of work design.

The average taxonomist is annoyed by the requirement to come up with diskashen, but nevertheless it should be admitted that in many cases this is only good for the work. For our magazines, a five-line introduction, then twenty pages of descriptions and nothing more is the norm. To get into the Vakov list, you need completely different qualities that have little to do with the quality of articles... What other incentives do our magazines offer?

The second reason is the low quality of the printing of domestic publications. How many Russian magazines are able to publish high-quality halftone drawings? And the photo? And the colored ones? Of the entomological journals I know, almost none, either by personal agreement and for their own money. No one seems to print color photos at all (or are they already printing them?).

Another point: many authors are initially extremely lazy in the sense of drawing. If it is possible to save money on drawings and print them quickly , they will most likely do so. Therefore, to a large extent, in my opinion, magazine editors should encourage authors to draw. That is, when they start wrapping articles regularly due to insufficient illustrations... there will be more drawings and photos in your works right away

This post was edited by Salix-05/08/2008 23: 26

Yes, that's right. thank you for your detailed response. As I understand it, everyone should make a conclusion themselves and try to cram more pictures in .

- Positively, more than! - It's just a pity that in the polyhaphic version, and even with excellent quality, you can't find them.

The Chinese (and maybe not the Chinese, it doesn't matter) say: One drawing replaces 100 words. I totally agree with that. Instead of writing: Wings of dark color with 3 white spots, etc. 2 paragraphs, isn't it better to give one photo, it will take up the same area when printing, and on a page on the Internet this is not a problem at all. At the same time, the text should indicate the features, otherwise until you finish reading all these descriptions, you will turn gray, or you will not notice something important behind these dark wings with 3 spots. I understand that before there was no digital technology and printing photos on the pages of a book or magazine was very expensive, but today it doesn't matter whether you print text or a drawing (especially on pages on the Internet).

Salix is telling the truth.
That's why it's an atlas, with pictures. It would be a different matter if the topic was called "Your attitude to DETERMINANTS". There are not always pictures here.

Nevertheless, even the most stingy determinant / atlas should provide illustrated differences between hard-to-define doubles ("triples" , etc.).
And there is nothing to say about the description of genitals at all. Everyone has their own understanding of the "degree of uncus reduction".

So without illustrations, nowhere. They are required at least in the minimum required volume.

Salix is telling the truth.
That's why it's an atlas, with pictures. It would be a different matter if the topic was called "Your attitude to DETERMINANTS". There are not always pictures here.

Nevertheless, even the most stingy determinant / atlas should provide illustrated differences between hard-to-define doubles ("triples" , etc.).
And there is nothing to say about the description of genitals at all. Everyone has their own understanding of the "degree of uncus reduction".

So without illustrations, nowhere. They are necessary at least in the minimum required volume.

Atlas to atlas discord. Here is an atlas that contains not just pictures, but enlarged and ordinary images for EACH of the mentioned types. Images of genitals for each species and gender.

A Taxonomic Atlas of the Eurasian and North African Noctuoidea

Pictures:

DSC00809.jpg — (152.55к)


DSC00812.jpg — (136.92к)

Yes, all sorts of atlases are necessary and very important. For someone valuable expensive, and it can not be cheap, for any group. And for some, the school atlas is a determinant, oh, how valuable. There should also be available atlases with huge circulations, because many of us started our passion with them. And those that are for narrow specialists. Well, it is clear that if you have grown up to comprehend any group in full, then you no longer need atlases, you are the atlas itself.

Go to the topic. Based on the above, I propose a high-quality Atlas "Beetles of Israel", containing more than 1200 species.(Exclusive)

Pictures:

A1.jpg — (195.77 k)


A2.jpg — (387.5к)


A3.jpg — (149.43к)


A4.jpg — (122.41к)


A5.jpg — (112.82 k)


A6.jpg — (297.74 k)

The book on Israel is very cool.

When are we going to see such events in the European part of Russia??? In Ukraine, well done-they produce such a chic and USEFUL series "Nature of Ukraine" - what else came out besides bulavousykh and sovok!?? Oh, if only they would have released part of the print run in Russian...

This post was edited by Penzyak - 10/25/2010 10: 53

My five kopecks per topic:
I once criticized this book about the definition of beetles: http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...dpost&p=1029075
Yesterday I got into it again and noticed how wonderful, in my opinion, Hawkmoth is represented in it. There can be no unambiguous relation to atlases (for better or worse).
Here, take a look (in my opinion, very good for beginners):

Pictures:

1.jpg — (243.68к)


2.jpg — (216.55 k)


3.jpg — (167.33 k)


4.jpg — (193.53к)

When are we going to see such events in the European part of Russia??? In Ukraine, well done-they produce such a chic and USEFUL series "Nature of Ukraine" - what else came out besides bulavousykh and sovok!?? Oh, if only they would have released part of the print run in Russian...

Unfortunately, this project is probably dead. Three books have been published: Diurnal, Scoops, Amphibians, and there are rumors that the day is due to the crisis. the cost of books is ridiculous - 7-8 Yandex units. They were freely acquired by school teachers, and of course by schoolchildren.

Unfortunately, this project is probably dead. Three books have been published: Diurnal, Scoops, Amphibians, and there are rumors that the day is due to the crisis. the cost of books is ridiculous - 7-8 Yandex units. They were freely acquired by school teachers, and of course by schoolchildren.

As far as I know, the project really died. There will be no more volumes, and the publisher is bankrupt. The price of books was low due to the series ' funding, and it was not self-funded...

I have a crazy idea to make an atlas of the days of butterflies of my republic. Butterflies will be: all types, series, all possible generations, variations, aberrations, etc. The material for filming is ready, it has been collected for more than 20 years. Question? Does anyone else need it?

I have a crazy idea to make an atlas of the days of butterflies of my republic. Butterflies will be: all types, series, all possible generations, variations, aberrations, etc. The material for filming is ready, it has been collected for more than 20 years. Question? Does anyone else need it?

Earn is unlikely to work if you are talking about it.

I understand! Express yourself apparently too!