The need for insects identifiers websites

Alexandr2014

You're right, but on top specialists (and you can count them on your fingers) it seems to me that there is an additional responsibility for promoting research. They are leaders. And we could pay more attention to the urgent needs of a wide range of entomologists.

Leading specialists probably do not have such a task.If it is in the work plans of educational institutions, creating such keys, then they will do it, but if it is outside of working hours, then this is amateur work and you don't need to be a leading specialist for this.
Probably so.
and creating keys for an amateur is "easier than simple", a specialist approaches more responsibly, and for him it is a serious work and he will not carry out serious work that would be put on the site, first publication-then the site.
.

It is obvious that many of them do not have such a task yet. Otherwise, the question would not have arisen. And the approach by type - "We'll study everything thoroughly first, and then maybe publish it", doesn't work.
The favorite determinant of the European part of the USSR is almost 50 years old. And since then, everyone has been studying and studying..., but the result in the form of such work is not given out. What, the current generation of researchers can not adequately take over the baton from the authors of that determinant? And it's even more offensive that research has been conducted for some groups, all the materials are available, but they are not published in a digestible form.
And the lack of such determinants hinders all faunal research on the ground. Analyze regional insect lists. If there is no bug in the identifier, then it is almost always missing from the lists. It is not included in regional lists and it is already difficult to determine the geographical distribution of the species. And the chain can continue...

"Saving the drowning is the work of the drowning themselves"
If you have a serious understanding of the group, make an addition to the identifier based on your data. join a certain group and put it on the site. There are already several examples here. and there will be additions and corrections, someone will take another group and so slowly master the road
Experts have very different problems, believe me.

Well, yes, yes... Other issues: "Who has liquid cabbage soup, and who has small pearls" - a popular saying. Only it's a common thing. Or are the stars so far removed from the people?
And at the expense of making up the determinant yourself....
This is precisely the contradiction: who can, doesn't want to, and who wants to, can't.
I immediately remember the toast: "So let's drink to the fact that our desires coincide with our capabilities!"

Alexander, you are a maximalist. I'm sorry. Let's go to the shelves:

1. Publishing a determinant requires money. Money for the actual publication. Type, compare, and print. As a rule, our "leaders" do not have the necessary capital for such a good cause - with very few exceptions. The publication of the determinant, say, with a volume of 400 pages, with a circulation of, say, 500 pieces, will cost at least 150 thousand rubles. This is the very minimum.

2. The work of the caller id component also requires payment. It is very easy for you to reason - you want to CONSUME the product. Have you thought about how it is produced? It's not cheese or sausage. In order to make a good determinant, a specialist needs to travel to museums. Spend years in the library. Draw or photograph a mountain of illustrations. Write and correct megatons of text. This must also be paid for. Who will handle the payment?

Believe me, an advanced user of keys is able to improve them, but there is only one problem-the lack of information about non-worthy types and materials . , here on the first Internet to help, but knowledge of a foreign language is mandatory, undefined material is sent to a specialist who determines. it is easier for a specialist to identify copies. write how type A differs from type B.
And creating keys by genera or groups is one of the cornerstones of systematics, which all experts try to bypass

Stanislav, I already wrote that it is not necessary to sculpt a complete determinant and even print it. They would have written at least modern keys for their own, studied groups and posted them at least on the ZIN website. Everything! At first... Let at least one of the pros make such an initiative.

Stanislav, I already wrote that it is not necessary to sculpt a complete determinant and even print it. They would have written at least modern keys for their own, studied groups and posted them at least on the ZIN website. Everything! At first... Let at least one of the pros make such an initiative. Maybe it'll work out.

Excuse me. but Zina's website didn't fall from the sky either. It was made by enthusiasts - and they continue, I must say, to replenish it, and very well. But-enthusiasts. This is the main thing.

Next, what makes you think that ZINA's site is free? Here, not so long ago, news leaked and there was even a topic that the ZIN site was in danger of ceasing to exist. I don't remember the reason why, but the point is the point. So, one of these reasons may just be an unpaid domain or hosting service. This is a life where no one has to pay for anyone.

Do you want good qualifiers? I can tell you how to do this.

Create a foundation to support the creation of qualifiers. Collect the money. Get the scientist (s) interested. Give them motivation (albeit in the form of a banal piece of butter for a daily piece of bread). Pay for their work, pay for the publication of the determinant in any way you want (whoever eats a girl, dances her). And that's it=). The community will have a determinant, you will make an invaluable contribution to science, and you will also receive the coveted work. Everyone is happy.

But just demand the product... You can, of course. But-the dog barks, and the caravan goes.

I hope they'll forgive me for my straightforward

Whoever can and wants to do it, does it
http://assazhnev.narod.ru/

Whoever can and wants to do it, does it
http://assazhnev.narod.ru/

http://coleop123.narod.ru/key/opredslon/opred_slon.html

So while the options are as follows:
1. Raise yourself to the level of a cool specialist and do the work yourself.
2. Pay for the job.
3. Give up on everything (it still won't work). And in 50 years, the desired work will probably be released.

And another option: catch the right specialist and do not let him go until, under the fear of brutal torture, he drops the right one. But after all, a specialist can mutate - become more quirky and sophisticated. And you can't track him down a second time...

In order to make a good determinant, a specialist needs to travel to museums. Spend years in the library. Draw or photograph a mountain of illustrations. Write and correct megatons of text.

In fact, many specialists do exactly this work for their own group, but they do not set the goal of writing keys.
In fact, a specialist who has thoroughly sorted out his group does not need a determinant - he will already determine his objects with his eyes closed - determinants are needed primarily for non-specialists in the group or beginners in research. But who cares about them?
Sending materials to a specialist for identification is a very convenient (for a specialist) practice - you don't need to write a determinant, if you receive interesting material - the author of the research is yours (only the most conscientious ones offer their co-authorship ) . So why write qualifiers - if they do not benefit the specialist!
And after that, something can be said about the popularization of entomology (and related sciences) - only those who really need it just post their materials or publish keys in the literature.
But in fact, studies of many groups of arthropods are just reduced to their faunistics and taxonomy, and the final result of which can (in part) be generalizing materials on the fauna and consolidated keys.
Bottom line: no one will simply make determinants, because it is not profitable either for work or for financial costs.
Communism ended

Here, it's getting warmer! It turns out that the cooler the specialist, the more bronzed he becomes and the more distant he becomes from the main mass of entomologists. And his interests become, if not opposite, then far removed from society, and from the benefit of the common cause.
God forbid that this should not become the rule.
Then there are other questions:
And who is he-a specialist for an amateur entomologist?
And how to deal with this b.....?

I think it's very simple. A specialist works for science, not on commission. When the work matures , it is done. You can't (just CAN't) write revisions just because you, as a specialist, can do it! "It" is born, "it" comes by itself, otherwise there is no way. This work is HELLISH (a large monograph), often-the work of a lifetime. It should bring pleasure, BUZZ. And the buzz is not particularly planned, it "comes by itself" when it wants.

Just using your own examples. Revision of Papuan species of the genus Macratria Newman (Anthicidae) I only wrote for 3 years (84 new views). Before that, there are still 5 years of trips to museums, expeditions to collect material, etc. During the preparation of the monograph, I simultaneously wrote / published more than 15 other shorter works. I could throw everything away and stupidly sit "hammering" some Macratria - but where is the joy? After all, you want to do what is pleasant to your soul. Today it's Macratria, tomorrow it's Pedilus, the day after tomorrow it's catching swimmers in the pond, and the day after that it's sowing Lithops seeds in the greenhouse.

And writing just because I CAN write it is not for me. Of course I can, I know all ~3500 species of Anthicidae, but I'm not even going to do such a monograph. Locomotives - they are just locomotives to SET THE GENERAL DIRECTION.

I hope I've explained it. Or am I selfish and far from the problems of society? And, by the way, who among the non-locomotives will dare to determine the views from my keys???

This post was edited by Anthicus - 29.08.2014 18: 30

Why would he risk it? If the keys are convenient, reliable and most importantly accessible, then I think they will determine and remember well. And the buzz from work is just fine. But also to help those who will not be able to delve so deeply into the topic of your research, by making the fruits of your work accessible-is it not a thrill? And if the group studied by the specialist is Russian and poorly represented in the published determinants, then how can we not talk about some responsibility of the researcher, and not just about his subtle feelings? Well, he developed a group, defended himself. Dolbaet further foreign species. And people with an outstretched hand asks - "share your knowledge with your uncle, otherwise the case suffers".
And he said to them: "no guys, I'll get high somehow and maybe... Faunistics on the ground can wait. I've been waiting for 50 years and will wait just as long, God be with you."
So it turns out?

I don't blame anyone. It's just that today science is placed in such conditions when colossal work is being done on taxonomy, which does not and cannot have any practical application at the moment (in my opinion for many groups). After all, in fact, why describe thousands of species of the same genus, if in the end some catalog of say the Voronezh Region will contain only 1-2 species that can be determined locally (when there are really more of them). What is the value in identifying poorly distinguishable species, in characterizing their subtle features, if they remain known only to the author? It's a philosophical question, but still.
And the point here is not limited to writing tons of articles like " A new kind of...". This is good, but a specialist (and therefore science) should not stop there, in my opinion. After all, these are just the bricks that make up the group's building. However, sometimes, some people set a goal to make more bricks than one standing (but difficult to build) building. I hope there are only a few of them.

But even if the revision is still far away, it is good if there is a kind of bibliography for the group (and even better, a scan library, although it is more difficult here due to copyright), which, although it does not provide ready-made material, will help you see the very "direction" set by the locomotive. But not all specialists have their own pages (or some combined resources). I repeat, I have no one in particular.

By the way, you can only talk about the degree of inapplicability of someone else's keys if they are available, so it's good when they are available.

And yes, for sure, any of the modern researchers (who are not retired yet or have not found the work of the first entomologists :- )) in fact, I started with some generalized works (albeit outdated, incomplete, but generalized. Few people immediately typed in all the small descriptions-re-descriptions and worked only on them. This is possible only if the group generally "falls from the sky" - that is, you are a pioneer in terms of generalization.

Why would he risk it? If the keys are convenient, reliable and most importantly accessible, then I think they will determine and remember well. And the buzz from work is just fine. But also to help those who will not be able to delve so deeply into the topic of your research, by making the fruits of your work accessible-is it not a thrill? And if the group studied by the specialist is Russian and poorly represented in the published determinants, then how can we not talk about some responsibility of the researcher, and not just about his subtle feelings? Well, he developed a group, defended himself. Dolbaet further foreign species. And people with an outstretched hand asks - "share your knowledge with your uncle, otherwise the case suffers".
And he said to them: "no guys, I'll get high somehow and maybe... Faunistics on the ground can wait. I've been waiting for 50 years and will wait just as long, God be with you."
So it turns out?

And he will risk it because not all groups are as large and clear as nymphalids or ladybirds (so forgive me the specialists who work in these groups)! To use any key, you need to know about a specific group. In the absence of what is called "understanding" and "flair" - no perfect key will save you.

I'm afraid the researcher is not responsible for the "people" who ask for "bread and circuses" to get nothing more than just THEIR HIGH (otherwise why else do you need it, do you need money for faunistics?!).

Standing with your hand outstretched is generally the easiest thing to do. And what prevents you from " bending the changing world "(or whatever it was with Makarevich)?

This post was edited by Anthicus - 29.08.2014 19: 59

  

I'm afraid the researcher is not responsible for the "people" who ask for "bread and circuses" to get nothing more than just THEIR HIGH (otherwise why else do you need it, do you need money for faunistics?!).

Standing with your hand outstretched is generally the easiest thing to do. And what prevents you from " bending the changing world "(or whatever it was with Makarevich)?

By the way, why do you need to research anything at all if no one will use it? Or should we stop there?

Another question is that (in this I agree with Dmitry) to work with any group requires experience, diligence, and (especially for taxonomy) really a kind of flair (but it can not arise from scratch).
Another question is that science is such a thing where each previous one tries to make it easier and clearer for subsequent researchers, otherwise everyone will simply stand still, reshuffling a bunch of selected species.

You're right, but on top specialists (and you can count them on your fingers) it seems to me that there is an additional responsibility for promoting research. They are leaders. And we could pay more attention to the urgent needs of a wide range of entomologists.

Specialists in the Russian Federation and neighboring countries usually have only one responsibility - to bring bread and butter to the family, well, a ticket to a foreign kurort What promotion, what leaders )))

50 years ago, everything was still on entuzazim, then they didn't think about money, they weren't supposed to), and it was unnecessary to think about them-a regular advance and PO in all educational institutions, and kurort was also guaranteed, even in Gelendzhik ), all sorts of Japanese mafons, jyns, vids and cool tachillas, and others temptations were inaccessible to the citizen scientist and therefore did not prevent him from giving himself to the great cause of creating knowledge
Now if you search for something in int, then only in the west, in the English segment, I have so far found EVERYTHING I needed there, in the public domain

Specialists in the Russian Federation and neighboring countries usually have only one responsibility - to bring bread and butter to the family, well, a ticket to a foreign kurort What promotion, what leaders )))

50 years ago, everything was still on entuzazim, then they didn't think about money, they weren't supposed to), and it was unnecessary to think about them-a regular advance and PO in all educational institutions, and kurort was also guaranteed, even in Gelendzhik ), all sorts of Japanese mafons, jyns, vids and cool tachillas, and others temptations were inaccessible to the citizen scientist and therefore did not prevent him from giving himself to the great cause of creating knowledge
Now, if you search for something in int, then only in the west, in the English segment, I have so far found EVERYTHING I needed there, in the public domain

There are few specialists who think about money. I don't know many of them. Rather, on the contrary , all specialists invest their money and time in science. And regardless of its geographical location. With a few exceptions (for example, good specialists who describe new taxa for commerce).

Specialists in the Russian Federation and neighboring countries usually have only one responsibility - to bring bread and butter to the family, well, a ticket to a foreign kurort What promotion, what leaders )))

50 years ago, everything was still on entuzazim, then they didn't think about money, they weren't supposed to), and it was unnecessary to think about them-a regular advance and PO in all educational institutions, and kurort was also guaranteed, even in Gelendzhik ), all sorts of Japanese mafons, jyns, vids and cool tachillas, and others temptations were inaccessible to the citizen scientist and therefore did not prevent him from giving himself to the great cause of creating knowledge
Now, if you search for something in int, then only in the west, in the English segment, I have so far found EVERYTHING I needed there, in the public domain

Science is not the most profitable business. Maybe it's better not to fool people's heads and do something more bread-based?

By the way, read my post again and carefully -

THREE (3) YEARS OF WRITING + FIVE (5) YEARS OF COLLECTING MATERIAL for ONE monograph.

How many of these can you publish in a lifetime? From the moment when, in the opinion of the "people", the special became a special?! Maybe I'm just a retard and need to write faster

This post was edited by Anthicus - 08/29/2014 20: 40

By the way, read my post again and carefully -

THREE (3) YEARS OF WRITING + FIVE (5) YEARS OF COLLECTING MATERIAL for ONE monograph.

How many of these can you publish in a lifetime? From the moment when, in the opinion of the "people", the special became a special?! Maybe I'm just a retard and need to write faster

Dmitry, don't call yourself a retard - I looked at your work (the ones I found - for the sake of, let's say, general interest, since your group does not come into contact with mine), so - you have serious work worthy of respect. This is so that you do not think that I am addressing claims to you.
You said that you are not going to do a general monograph - please tell us why. Maybe because it's not practical, not productive (for science), you don't have enough time, don't have the opportunities, or it's just inconvenient and uninteresting?
You have the right not to answer, of course

The fact that you have worked long and carefully on your group is highly respected. I take off my hat. I hope the work is published and available? (I'm just sorry not on your topic, I don't know about this).
The conversation is not about getting a specialist to develop a group that they are not interested in from scratch, so that others can use it. The problem is that some specialists deliberately do not lay out the fruits of their work for a wide range of people. I'm tempted to name groups and names, but it would be unethical. Yes, and the question is in principle. I figured out the group - publish the keys. If there are organizational difficulties, post them on the Internet, don't sit like a "dog in the manger". After all, he himself once searched for the sources of his predecessors, and rose on their shoulders. Here's the question.

There are few specialists who think about money. I don't know many of them. Rather, on the contrary , all specialists invest their money and time in science. And regardless of its geographical location. With a few exceptions (for example, good specialists who describe new taxa for commerce).

About the location is hard to believe, in the post-USSR, but outside the EU, there are many of them?

Simply, you need to take into account that "specialist" does not always mean an enthusiast and a person who gives his life to his business. Most often, this is a person who works in acc. In addition to his work, which he devotes his life to, he has a lot of papers, reports, and sometimes students, and a family at home. But this is at best, because under the union it was also so, but there were enthusiasts and there were books, just then people were less tempted by material goods and capital accumulation, they did not do work, they created )))
Approximately the same now in the EU, I mean of course indigenous people, they do not care about the apartment and the car and the sandwich, they have all this by default, so they go to school not "to work by eight and until 17")

Science is not the most profitable business. Maybe it's better not to fool people's heads and do something more bread-based?

And if a person just wants to "live like a human being"(read in European) in Russia, for example, and science is actually not so much "not bread" as very expensive! And any! The same faunistics - you need to go, go and go, live essentially on the road, taxonomy-you need a molecular laboratory, ethology in general, all these micro sensors and cameras and scanners, money is needed in the end for the same edition of the determinant and the site, will the state give them or what fund in the Russian Federation? No, it won't give

Yes, there are a lot of difficulties. Everyone gets out of it as best they can. But now, for example, on the ZIN website, they will easily post material (especially from a person who is respected in science). There would be a desire. But with the desire and motivation, there are often problems. Some people just don't want to put them in a stump.

This is 100%, there is no desire. But again, all this is rooted in a buttered sandwich, when you want to have a good meal and relax, you don't want anything else

It will pass. Get strong and get to work. If you don't want to post it on the site, there are plenty of other options. But the fruits of scientific research should be accessible!

About butter. Having heard enough about the financial disasters of Russian scientists, in the best (for me) times I threw off ads for those who wanted oil - there were tasks on the site to bring the local classification into a more decent form and constantly monitor it. I.e. no requirements for the schedule, availability anywhere geographically, etc. and at the same time you can be more-less within the scope of their interests (not quite narrow, of course, but still). Nifiga. Zero emotions. I admit that I did something wrong with these suggestions, but still the result is completely negative.
On business. If someone is engaged and will be in search of a site, then I can offer <url> on butterflies. Dviglo specially for you will do, well, and if the determinant is also polytomic, then it will generally turn out to be a sight to behold. Of course, with all your copyrights.

Start by doing something yourself, for example, translating some popular old key from a scan into an interactive electronic format, even in HTML, as in efloras.org. And then the people will start to catch up...
At the next stage, you can transfer the key to some wiki platform and then ask specialists to look at and correct what they think are obvious mistakes. Well, it will go.

About the location is hard to believe, in the post-USSR, but outside the EU, there are many of them?

Simply, you need to take into account that "specialist" does not always mean an enthusiast and a person who gives his life to his business. Most often, this is a person who works in acc. In addition to his work, which he devotes his life to, he has a lot of papers, reports, and sometimes students, and a family at home. But this is at best, because under the union it was also so, but there were enthusiasts and there were books, just then people were less tempted by material goods and capital accumulation, they did not do work, they created )))
Approximately the same now in the EU, I mean, of course, indigenous people, they do not have worries about an apartment and a car and a sandwich, they have all this by default, so they go to school not "to work by eight and until 17" )

By 8 to 17 to work does not mean that a person does not work at home. In my opinion, it is at least unethical to speak like this about all Europeans without fully knowing the situation. Or maybe you have lived in Germany or Great Britain for 5-6 years and worked in museums there on a par with your local colleagues? I do not exclude that many of you have a different idea or experience about the style and way of life in the West, but what does this have to do with the fanaticism and passion for their profession for entomologists? Yes, 2-3 cars, yes-a house or apartment, yes-guaranteed earnings. This should make me work BETTER, not worse. Logical? Well, it's time to stop talking about this topic.

This post was edited by Anthicus - 08/31/2014 09: 31

Yes, God would take off these Western entomologists. Of course, everything is better for them. Talk about our people. And we will probably wait at such a pace that the determinant for Russia will be published by some German in Bavaria in German. But will our leading experts perceive this as a disgrace? Or not anymore?

By 8 to 17 to work does not mean that a person does not work at home. In my opinion, it is at least unethical to speak like this about all Europeans without fully knowing the situation. Or maybe you have lived in Germany or Great Britain for 5-6 years and worked in museums there on a par with your local colleagues? I do not exclude that many of you have a different idea or experience about the style and way of life in the West, but what does this have to do with the fanaticism and passion for their profession for entomologists? Yes, 2-3 cars, yes-a house or apartment, yes-guaranteed earnings. This should make me work BETTER, not worse. Logical? Well, it's time to stop talking about this topic.

What do you mean by that?" Chet things have been really bad lately..
I was just wondering how my message could be interpreted to write such a thing.

Start by doing something yourself, for example, translating some popular old key from a scan into an interactive electronic format, even in HTML, as in efloras.org. And then the people will start to catch up...
At the next stage, you can transfer the key to some wiki platform and then ask specialists to look at and correct what they think are obvious mistakes. Well, it will go.

What's this for? It's about new qualifiers with new taxonomy and new species. And "people" is also not good, we are talking about specialists.

Yes, God would take off these Western entomologists. Of course, everything is better for them. Talk about our people. And we will probably wait at such a pace that the determinant for Russia will be published by some German in Bavaria in German. But will our leading experts perceive this as a disgrace? Or not anymore?

A bold hint

This post was edited by Hierophis - 08/31/2014 23: 55

What's this for? It's about new qualifiers with new taxonomy and new species. And "people" is also not good, we are talking about specialists.

I meant the specialists.
New keys are often made by fixing the old ones. Otherwise, the entry threshold is too high.