Popularity rating of entomology textbooks

But there is nothing to offer... Alas, something is wrong with our textbooks....

Familiar with the first three (Kholodkovsky last ed., Shvanchich-the larger of the two). In my opinion (incorrectly superficial) these are different books for different purposes (readers).
I like (and as the most balanced) the chapter of Professor N. Ya. Kuznetsov in the Manual of Zoology, vol. 3, (1950).

The translation of the book by the three Rossovs (G., Ch., and D.) turned out to be very interesting and useful for me personally (especially the first 7 chapters).

Familiar with the first three (Kholodkovsky last ed., Shvanchich-the larger of the two). In my opinion (incorrectly superficial) these are different books for different purposes (readers).

I agree, they are in "different weight categories". Shvanvich, of course, is out of competition, but it is rather a Handbuch in the good old style (is there a corresponding term in Russian - a textbook?), and not a textbook.

I also liked Rossy

For some reason, they forgot Nikita Kluge's excellent "Modern Taxonomy of Insects". And of the general textbooks, the most competent, thoughtful and balanced, of course, is Kholodkovsky's textbook, not taking into account the obsolescence, of course. The revised posthumous edition is generally a masterpiece. Shvanvich is something like an encyclopedia, Ross is too superficial, and everything else does not hold up at all.

I'm familiar with all the textbooks. except for Kholodkovsky. I didn't come across him. As for Zachatkin, I didn't really like his structure and manner of presentation. My opinion as a textbook - in terms of a textbook, not an entomological encyclopedia - is that Bienko is the leader. It's not big, but it's informative and simply written. Shvanvich, of course, is a very detailed work, but it is very difficult to use it as a textbook. I would not recommend anyone to take an entomological test on it . But you can use it as an encyclopedia to specify any facts. Chesno admit-voted for Shvanvich, as it is really very voluminous and the best work on general entomology. From the pedagogical point of view, Bey-Bienko is more correct. As for the Rosses... I still have them. There was a time when you could only buy them . The book is interesting, but not for our brother. There are a lot of facts, pictures, examples, but very few generalizations and patterns. The book is also more like an additional one than a desktop one. So much for my opinion-a desktop textbook is Bey-Bienko, an encyclopedia is Shvanvich, an additional Rossa. I won't count Zachatkin, because he doesn't give me anything new in principle. A comparison with Bey-Bienko does not stand up.

My opinion as a textbook - in terms of a textbook, not an entomological encyclopedia - is that Bienko is the leader. It's not big, but it's informative and simply written. So much for my opinion-the desktop textbook is Bey-Bienko, encyclopedia-Shvanvich,

I agree. I recently read Bey-Bienko and was pleasantly surprised, there is almost everything that I was interested in finding, stated clearly, logically and sufficiently (for a relatively small volume) in depth. And most importantly, it is interesting to read.

This post was edited by amara - 02/18/2008 18: 47

For some reason, they forgot Nikita Kluge's excellent "Modern Taxonomy of Insects".

Too overloaded with the author's peculiar nomenclature ideas - the student will not understand this. And so it's not bad, a lot of pictures.

Shoffer - not the most popular one. MSU is one thing, but hundreds of provincial universities are another.

Too overloaded with the author's peculiar nomenclature ideas - the student will not understand this. And so it's not bad, a lot of pictures.

The attitude towards this book and its author is developing according to a long-known scenario. "The reformer, that is, anyone who professes a new art, science, or politics, is doomed for life to overcome the hostile influence of the environment, which at best sees in him a pompous buffoon or a hoaxer. Everything that the hero denies - and he is a hero precisely because of this denial-turns against him: traditions, customs, the precepts of the fathers, everything national, local, stagnant. All this forms a century-old layer of earth, a crust of impenetrable thickness. And the hero wants to sweep away this burden with the help of a thought, a particle weightless than air, which has arisen in the imagination. And then the conservative instinct of inertia takes revenge on him, sending him realism in the face of comedy." Jose Ortega y Gasset.

Shoffer - not the most popular one.

And what is the most popular one?

MSU is one thing, but hundreds of provincial universities are another.

Don't take people for fools.

Shoffer - not the most popular one. MSU is one thing, but hundreds of provincial universities are another.

Thank you, I'm happy...

Shoffer - not the most popular one. MSU is one thing, but hundreds of provincial universities are another.

Here's a joke, I wanted to quote Juglans, but instead I clicked on thank you. I don't know what to do now. In general, an interesting point is obtained before expressing your dissatisfaction and claims, thank you for someone else's point of view. Everything seems to have worked out somehow. I can present claims

A person can study at least in boarding school No. 3 even in Oxford. If the first is given a talent from God, and the second is an ass. Then there's nothing you can do about it. People from the hinterland, on the contrary, seem to me more persistent. They need to make their way in life, and urban domestic cats are the same themselves many Mguushniki rich parents, I doubt that very smart.

to study at Moscow State University, you need not only money, otherwise you will not last long

but in the Gos, Polytech and many others, the opposite is just more necessary.. _

This post was edited by RippeR - 02/25/2009 17: 01

A person can study at least in boarding school No. 3 even in Oxford. If the first is given a talent from God, and the second is an ass.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. It is as if in childhood the child did not receive proper nutrition, then this will continue for the rest of his life. So it is with training - if the student is not given the necessary knowledge in time,then this will be discussed...

Unfortunately, these are practical observations during graduate students ' exams. Answers quite a nice person, and responds well! In the volume of Rossov or Bay-Bienko, I recall Nikita Yulievich - he would not have passed it at all. The whole tragedy is that you understand that the applicant is not to blame! He was taught that way, or rather not taught. And about modern, especially foreign, literature, he does not know at all. And his teachers did not know about it and do not know... Sad colleagues...

Fortunately, this is treated by self-education. In the end, the Teacher only introduces you to the gate. Unfortunately, very few people really want to learn.

  
A person can study at least in boarding school No. 3 even in Oxford. If the first is given a talent from God, and the second is an ass. Then there's nothing you can do about it. People from the hinterland, on the contrary, seem to me more persistent. They need to make their way in life, and urban domestic cats are the same themselves many Mguushniki rich parents, I doubt that very smart.

Ay-ay-ay, young man! If you are in Moscow, go to the MSU biofactory department and chat with people, you will be very surprised about the "urban domestic cats of rich parents". Stereotypes are certainly a strong thing, but you should not indiscriminately judge what you don't know.

I am very worried about the lack of my entomological education. I consider myself a fairly knowledgeable person, but when I was present at a discussion between two graduates of the St. Petersburg State University Entomology Department, I realized how much, much, much I don't know. Education in a good university is very important!