Is it ethical to sell paratypes?

They are in museums, so don't worry. A holotype in ZINe

They are in museums, so don't worry. And the holotype is in Zina

I always worry when scientists from science make money for themselves! ALL paratypes have a place in museums!!! This is my opinion.

This post was edited by swerig - 12/20/2009 20: 23

I always worry when scientists from science make money for themselves! ALL paratypes have a place in museums!!! This is my opinion.

Having your own opinion is very important. But do not worry, it can provoke neurosis.
Do you know the differences between the nomenclature type and the type series, neotype, lectotype, holotype, syntype, kotype, topotype...??? Find me an article of the code that says that all paratypes must be kept in a museum. Write your advice to de Freina, Witt, Churkin, Eichberger, and others. Scold the scoundrels who make science and money from science. Write to such friends as Watanabe, Yoshikawa, Konda, Fujioka. These emails will automatically teach you how to distinguish between Japanese and Chinese surnames.
The most valuable opinion of a person who himself ate a pound of salt in these things. This is my opinion. Have you described a lot of taxa, published articles, and identified lectotypes??? Have you studied the ICZN?

This post was edited by Yakovlev - 12/23/2009 15: 51

  ALL paratypes belong in museums

The authors of taxa, when distributing types, solve the problem of preservation of materials and their availability for researchers themselves. The more places a type is located, the better its safety is. It is a good tone to put types in the leading collections of your country and the world. But this is not a mandatory requirement.

0_o terrible thing, this mkzn..

Having your own opinion is very important. But do not worry, it can provoke neurosis.
Do you know the differences between the nomenclature type and the type series, neotype, lectotype, holotype, syntype, kotype, topotype...??? Find me an article of the code that says that all paratypes must be kept in a museum. Write your advice to de Freina, Witt, Churkin, Eichberger, and others. Scold the scoundrels who make science and money from science. Write to such friends as Watanabe, Yoshikawa, Konda, Fujioka. These emails will automatically teach you how to distinguish between Japanese and Chinese surnames.
The most valuable opinion of a person who himself ate a pound of salt in these things. This is my opinion. Have you described a lot of taxa, published articles, and identified lectotypes??? Have you studied the ICZN?

I can see that it doesn't really matter if you have nomenclature-type differences. Although you equate yourself with the luminaries of modern entomology (Freine, Witt, Churkin, Eichberger), you have written a lot of articles, described many taxa, etc.
I'm just an amateur, but that doesn't disqualify me from having my own opinions. Believe me, I understand my field of activity better than you, and you understand yours better than me - but this is how it should be - this is our job!!!
But if I did what you do in my job, it would be:
1. Using your official position for personal gain
2. Illegal business activity

Your sarcasm about the difference in surnames is understandable. I was wrong, I didn't look at the descriptors( for some reason it seemed that it was the Japanese who described it).
But, as they say, the one who does nothing is not mistaken, and, apparently, Dr. Yakovlev.

This post was edited by swerig - 12/24/2009 10: 19

The authors of taxa, when distributing types, solve the problem of preservation of materials and their availability for researchers themselves. The more places a type is located, the better its safety is. It is a good tone to put types in the leading collections of your country and the world. But this is not a mandatory requirement.

If you think that by selling paratypes, taxa authors solve the problem of preserving materials and making them available to researchers, then you are mistaken. Believe me, they solve COMPLETELY different problems.

This post was edited by swerig - 12/24/2009 11: 47

I've been wrong many times, take my word for it.
Now I try to do it less often. Although anything can happen.
For your information, I did not equate myself with luminaries, in addition, I did not write the names of luminaries (let them forgive me), but of persons who are well-known entomologists, as well as other types of work related to entomology.
I note once again that it is very important and good to have an opinion, and again I write that there are no instructions in the Code that all copies of the standard series should be kept in a state institution. That's all...
For your information, I don't work as a biologist...
and stop bickering

a very clear and logical thing to do. the main thing is to understand the four pillars of zoological nomenclature (the principle of coordination, the principle of priority, the principle of homonymy, the principle of typification) - and then everything is very, very banal. however, I talked a lot about this topic with the late Izyaslav Moiseyevich ^^.

there are still difficulties...

If you think that by selling paratypes, the Authors of taxa, when distributing types, solve the problem of preserving materials and making them available to researchers, then you are mistaken. Believe me, they solve COMPLETELY different problems.

And what tasks do taxon authors solve when distributing types? It is very important to actually choose the depository where the type will stand. If the series is large, then of course it doesn't hurt to put small segments of the standard series in a couple of museums. If the type series is originally my property, then I decide to preserve the holotypes as follows: Palearctic-ZIN, tropics-Witt Museum. Paratypes were sent to the Institute of Natural History of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Moscow State University Zoo Museum, Tokyo, the British Museum, etc.
There are, of course, purely commercial descriptions, unfortunately... and even worse, when the type is in a private collection or somewhere in Lhasa... There is such a thing! Then there is no way to touch it...

This post was edited by Yakovlev - 12/24/2009 11: 08

  
And stop bickering

I didn't even argue! I gave you an opinion that you didn't like very much. Up to my neurosis And your excellent knowledge of Japanese and Chinese surnames (read your post)

This post was edited by swerig - 12/24/2009 11: 08

The character is so...
Happy New Year. Don't hold grudges!

I would like the code to adopt a strict rule for giving descriptions in English. Since it so happens that zoologists describe in all languages except Latin, then we must come to English. When I see descriptions in Chinese, Japanese, or Hungarian (may Oleg - barko forgive me)... this kills

Why is it that in botany all descriptions are made in Latin? To make each other's lives easier...

It seems to me that if a series of beetles is not large, and even more so a few copies, then they must have a place in museums! After all, this is the material that generations will then work with, which will be used to compare all other copies, write articles, make revisions, etc., etc. That is, it should be placed in an accessible but safe place for scientists-a museum.
And anything can happen to a private collection.. Yes, the mouse ran unnoticed, waved its tail, and the egg broke.
Moreover, many do not allow you to look at their types.. Well, etc.

But if the series is large, then part of it goes to museums, and you can not part with the other part, since there are still a lot of them..

This post was edited by RippeR - 12/24/2009 13: 52

>Why is it that in botany all descriptions are made in Latin? To make each other's lives easier...
First, it is a tribute to tradition. Secondly, there is a certain "principle of equal need" (well, not counting the natives of the Vatican - although due to celibacy, such people hardly exist ). I am not at all a proponent of "national-parochial sciences" (and even in the 19th century, different countries had different rules of zoological nomenclature, by the way) - but I am not a proponent of considering science as a kind of industry that serves Americans and other English-speaking people and does everything for their convenience. Objectively, there is an already abnormal situation when Americans, Englishmen and others like them do not allow themselves to read non-English-language scientific papers at all - and articles on zoological systematics, due to the principle of priority and other restrictions imposed by the code, remain in this sense the last bastion not only for Russian, but also for German French and other languages that are at risk of dying out as scientific languages (which, in fact, is a cultural disaster). Before World War II, it was considered normal for a biologist to read and write in several foreign languages.

Personally, I like the articles in Russian and English. But in Russian, there are almost none on the topics I need (to me). I don't think it's the Americans ' fault. And it just so happens that it is English that has become a kind of global language. It is spoken in Africa, Asia, and Australia. And there's nothing abnormal about it. Personally, it's convenient for me. Yes, and the global tragedy is not visible. But the articles (books) are in German, French, Greek, Italian, etc. I can't actually use it (although I buy many of them). There is a certain shtetl in this.. Like, for your own people.. So you give more good articles and books in English (if they are not in Russian:)) .

However, the same students suffer - and I can't blame them for their poor knowledge of English: our education is so "crooked". About the "tragedy" - if it is not noticed, it does not mean that it does not exist.

Let them learn English better - it will be useful to them in life. I don't know a single person who would be disturbed by it. I doubt that there is any other practical way out of this situation. Everything else is "pro-poor" talk.

Yes, and I learned English when I needed it , but it didn't change my point of view.

You know, when a German professor of physiology told me "Die deutsche wissenschaftliche Sprache ist tot" in 2000, I was not just sad, I was uneasy. He, too, did not complain about this, but was not happy, of course.

Even the Germans, whose contribution to Palearctic Beetle science probably has no equal, are losing ground, and the Four-volume Book (!) Handbook of Beetle Zoology, ed. Beitel himself (the book is a dream of any bugger) is published under the German title in English:
http://books.google.com/books?id=4dewM7dLu...page&q=&f=false

(only selected pages are listed here)

It's not Bill Gates ' fault, but the fact that the Americans took very good advantage of their victory in World War 2.

Well, actually, the Allies won, of which we made the greatest contribution to the victory and lost the most people, but the Americans dragged to themselves the most German values, including brains.

Come to your senses - where am I belittling you?! I'm just talking about skimming the cream , which is something else entirely.

As far as I know, until the end of the 30s of the last century, zoology was dominated by the German chzyk. But not everyone knew English... Back in the 60s, Timofeev-Ressovsky complained that this" dog " (English) replaced all other languages from biology.

That's the point. But in general, it is impossible to say about some kind of hopeless "domination" of the German language. If you take the "Yearbooks of the Zoological Museum of the Imperial Academy of Sciences" of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there are many works in Russian, German, and French. In English, too, come across, although there are fewer of them. You can say, of course, that this publication is not representative, because it reflects some Russian specifics, but I think it consists only in the presence of works in Russian.

This post was edited by PVOzerski - 12/24/2009 17: 33

education is not crooked. students are crooked. I had learned German all my life ( both at school and at university), and it was spoken in my family. and I needed English - I learned it in six months. there would be a desire.

This is for sure - what is happening now with higher education and students is simply horrifying.
Soon a student who reads Russian fluently will be a rarity. The level of knowledge about the environment is reduced to zero. In the presence of a large number of gifted and hardworking guys, of course. Due to the duty of my work, which is a little related to psychology and biology, I will say that now MOST biology students do not know the surnames of Fabre, Attenborough, Darrell (!). And the students of psychology whom I asked in a fit of fun what the phrase "We are going after the Kusturica film" means-they told me that Kusturica is a verb, like "hang out, go get a drink."

This is true: from me, students learn for the first time not only about Fabre, but even about Arsenyev (the one that "Dersu Uzala" wrote). But it is all the more important to simplify the starting conditions for those who would be happy to become a biologist, but their own lack of preparation is frightening.

When I talk to my biology peers who are only 12-17 years older than the current student , everyone grew up reading these books. Almost everyone was interested and eager for education. Yes, they drank, but they skipped school. We didn't stay in the profession - there are a lot of niches for the best share. Therefore, such things as the Unified State Exam and school education have become simply terrible starting points for universities. When I wrote this phrase, I caught myself thinking that I clenched my teeth tightly. Apparently, if Fursenko was nearby... They create, they don't know what...

What Arsenyev, what Fabre! Colleagues, today's young people cannot really say who V. I. Lenin is. About Chapaev, Kotovsky, Chkalov, Pokryshkin and there is no question!
Moreover, I was scared here by one IV-year medical student(I won't say from which university, I won't disgrace you) - I couldn't say that the percutaneous borders of the liver are normal. But that's when it got scary.

In order not to offload, I will say that valuable copies, including standard ones in a private collection, will be preserved better. At least in OUR country.

In the new history textbook, which is included in the project, there is no surname of G. K. Zhukov, but modern ones ... up to and including family members. I've seen this tutorial file myself! When you see this, you want to cram paratypes together with a pin in one place to the authors of this textbook. Yes, that there is a paratype - the entire standard series...

This post was edited by Bolivar - 12/25/2009 00: 54

In the new history textbook, which is included in the project, there is no surname of G. K. Zhukov, but modern ones ... up to and including family members. I've seen this tutorial file myself! When you see this, you want to cram paratypes together with a pin in one place to the authors of this textbook. Yes, that there is a paratype - the entire standard series...

and that the pin was like this, the 7th number

At the federal level, the Erudite Olympiad is held among primary school students - there are questions "what kind of fog looks like a deception", "what is the filling of a Bounty bar"... but there are no questions about the Patriotic War, Gagarin.

At the federal level, the Erudite Olympiad is held among primary school students - there are questions "what kind of fog looks like a deception", "what is the filling of a Bounty bar"... but there are no questions about the Patriotic War, Gagarin.

Everything is clear. lobbied by V. Dobrynin and Mars inc.

Or the CIA, or human stupidity

search and find.

... and don't give up

valuable items, including standard ones, will be better preserved in a private collection. At least in OUR country.

They are saved better. But, often, the end of the collector=the end of the collection.
Yes, and the availability of information about the material and access to the material itself in a private collection=0 mostly.

Yes, the age of encyclopedists is ending. people leave without having had time to pass on our main values to young people - to teach them to think, be interested, search and find.

I won't post what I've already said. See.:
http://molbiol.ru/forums/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=894108