New Russian Zoological Journals

to omar: All the arguments given about the advantages of "electronic" storage of information over paper, in my opinion, are not convincing. I won't explain, because it really doesn't fit the topic.

I don't know...
It seems to me that the publication of many weak, rarely published (1-2 times a year) regional magazines is a hopeless task. Even their names are the same.
Maybe you need to combine the efforts of all the editorial offices and start making one common magazine, call it, say, the Siberian Zoological Journal, transfer everything online, distribute color PDF files (I've heard complaints about the quality of color printing).Make 6-12 issues or just issues like in Zookeys, Zootaxa or Journal of Natural History (by the way, you can see the table of contents of all issues of this very respectable publication, which has switched to weekly issues since 2005. Here's a great example of the magazine's evolution! )
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713192031

"Strong" magazines are not born, but become.

The multiplication of "Messengers" is much more harmful to our science. If instead of these" Bulletin of the National University", zoological authors will be published in Zoological publications, then it will become easier to search for their work.
Of course, "foreign colleagues" don't care, mostly, about our journals (such as Vestnik), but this makes sense for the development of our science.

There is no such thing as "our science".

This post was edited by Shoffer - 25.09.2010 23: 14

Our science does not happen, then just science...
Well, true, there is no bulletin of the Altai or Blagoveshchensk State University in London. But there are animal magazines. So they can be found there by anyone who needs it. They will be quoted in ZR. And how many results, sometimes quite good ones, are buried in the heralds or materials of conferences like "Mountains and Mountaineers of Altai", where there were articles on butterflies and on the costume of Kumandins and on the biography of Choros-Gurkin.

Our science does not happen, then just science...
Well, true, there is no bulletin of the Altai or Blagoveshchensk State University in London. But there are animal magazines. So they can be found there by anyone who needs it. They will be quoted in ZR. And how many results, sometimes quite good ones, are buried in the heralds or materials of conferences like "Mountains and Mountaineers of Altai", where there were articles on butterflies and on the costume of Kumandins and on the biography of Choros-Gurkin.

This is another problem. And here in it the same www can help at once. If the editors of these same messengers and conference materials were dedicated to science, then at least the table of contents of their immortal publications would be available via the Internet. So we can immediately see the attitude of small-town editorial offices to popularize their work.

There is no such thing as "our science".

Things happen. Although, maybe soon it will not be...

As Vasily Anikin says


"20 years ago:

- Do you have Science and life

- There is science and there is no life

same question now

- Life IS THERE - SCIENCE is GONE "

What can I say?..

My will - I would generally publish in more or less democratic (not laying hands on your copyright) "murzilki" - and then duplicate the publications on the Internet. As a matter of fact, I began to do this in part. There are, however, a few buts. 1) Formalities like the notorious "Vakov list". Here, by the way, another side of the "murzilok" comes out-although not as altruistic as the ones just mentioned. It's just that among the particularly toothy individuals of this type of publication, there are those who broke through to the VAKOV list and make money on this circumstance. Their valuable quality is efficiency. When the problem of the "list" is relevant, you can't help but think. 2) For taxonomists-restrictions related to the Code. Although "murzilki" do not contradict the code - but if they have a paper version, and are not purely electronic publications. 3) Almost a year of hanging on the web of my article did not lead to a single response to it, not counting those that were from long-time and well-known people. This is despite the fact that the article is easily found by search engines like Google.

Russian science has always been respected in the international community. I don't think it is correct to say only science is science, it is primarily a scientific school, and it has very clearly traced and usually national roots. This is what "our" science is all about-the school of Kurentsov, Beibienko, Smirnov, and Tsiolkovsky. And on the other side - the Hennig, Wright, Wilkins school. Schools have their own hierarchy, traditions, and attitudes to facts and methods of interpreting them. Your own worldview. All this forms the national color of science - for example, over the past 20 years, Russian science has become much more commercialized (the hungry belly is deaf to the teaching). But this is a temporary phenomenon, a learned person can not be changed - the thirst for knowledge will wake up immediately at the end of a meal.

Good. Let's do this. I will now attach a file here, a text file, by the way, made 15 years ago in a very popular text editor for Unix, but incompatible with Windows. If you can read it for, say, a day and post its contents here , I will admit that you are right. If not, the opposite is true. Good enough? To read this file, you will need just a little: a 1995 Sun Microsistems workstation and the necessary software (including Unix itself).

Oh, come on, this is interesting.

Everything is rapidly going online, in 5 years paper scientific publications will become an anachronism. In addition, high-quality paper printing is expensive. Now journals with high impact make a paper version rather for reasons of prestige, (entomological also at the request of the Code).

Proctos - any journal with an impact factor MUST make a paper version (otherwise this impact is not calculated). Imagine that our domestic magazines will go online in 5 years - I DON'T BELIEVE IT! But peripheral logs can do this quite easily.

As for "murzilok", there is a great example of where there are a lot of them and this benefits science - Japan. They have their own publications not only in every university, but also in different museums. Yes, it is difficult to get them, but the advantage is that they publish numerous faunal finds (such articles are not accepted in decent magazines) - as a result, the distribution of many species in Japan is thoroughly studied. For example, we know the mollusk fauna of almost every bay in Japan, and this is extremely important for zoogeography.