Insects of the European part of Russia. Atlas with an overview of biology

Community and Forum → Literature and websites → Insects of the European part of Russia. Atlas with an overview of biology

Насекомовед, 10.02.2013 16:15

A collective monograph has recently been put on retail sale "Insects of the European part of Russia. Atlas with an overview of biology". The book is dedicated to the memory of G. N. Gornostaev. It contains 568 pages of about 1000 color natural macrophotographs of insects from 25 orders. A team of 13 authors of the text, 19 authors of photos, more than 20 specialists-consultants and collectors in different groups worked on the book. The Atlas of Insects of the European part of Russia is recommended as a textbook for students of biological specialties, can be used as a reference for employees of environmental services, teachers of universities and schools, and is also intended for the widest range of nature lovers.

The book is heavy, hardcover, stitched, printed in Latvia on glossy coated paper. The only sad thing is that the circulation is relatively small - only 1300 copies. I don't know the exact price yet. But intelligence reported that the sale this weekend in Moscow on the "Golden Turtle" was 1300 rubles. and it was swept away without a trace. Now on the book ruins I saw this book a little more expensive, at 1700 rubles.

In addition to stores, the publisher is also engaged in sales but so far this book is not on his list. Below are some screenshots of the layout that went to print.

user posted image

Comments

Pages: 1 2

Likes: 2

10.02.2013 17:24, Hierophis

"and also designed for the widest range of nature lovers."

"the circulation is relatively small - only 1300 copies."

Do you call it "relatively small"?? Yes, this is the circulation of a methodical manual at Moscow State University, probably..

I looked at the circulation in the existing "heavy" Soviet atlases and encyclopedias(400-900 pages) - less than 100,000 copies-no!!!! The price of an encyclopedic dictionary, 780 pages, circulation 150,000, 14 rubles ($14 in eq). I bought this book almost before I was born))) And then they said that it was rare.
And then, this is an encyclopedia, a very specific book, and the atlases were generally 30 kopecks, although not so painted, but quite for amateurs.

And who will buy their young naturalist this atlas, which still needs to be found, for $ 60?
This book will be sold to collectors, that's all.

Empus ' PS

This post was edited by Hierophis - 10.02.2013 17: 30

Likes: 1

10.02.2013 22:49, Guest

a good edition? otherwise, the books of Liu Trayvas from the same publisher are creepy....

Don't you like Trayvas?" The pictures there are cool, well ponder Fraxinia with a woodworm confused, but the Christmas tree with a pine nesmogli

And mulberry, too, pictures are not bad

The publisher does not exclude additional print runs after the first one is fully implemented. So far, the book is in demand and is distributed at exhibitions and other events. We'll see...

Sasha, don't get too excited, Harashe's still buiting

It turns out correctly so. I didn't convince him (the science editor)

The one who has more rights is right!

Cool! As far as I remember, in the biological version, s between vowels is read as z, everywhere in all editions there was a pause, and here you are, innovation and modernization

And ishko nanotechnologies in one bottle

I absolutely agree with you...

I absolutely agree with you...

What but...? For the Truth it was necessary to fight to the end! ATO will soon recognize that black is white, for the sake of conformism. And then how will you look your children in the eye, eh?

Oh, if only this thing got into children's libraries...

Oh, if only this thing got into children's libraries... Especially in naturalistic circles.

Ehhh, it would be better not to get

caught and would be distributed to collectors-goons all bohatenkim

11.02.2013 10:15, Насекомовед

Colleagues, you are not quite right... In fact, I have to (just have to) say words in defense of the scientific editor and the pronunciation/spelling of "empus". If, indeed, without going into details, blindly follow the letter of the law of pronunciation, then I, of course, am for "empuSa" (it is also more familiar). But, as I understand it, the scientific editor, a well-deserved person and a professional in his field, followed from the correct position that in any language, and even Latin, there are exceptions to the rules. These exceptions include proper names (including those of mythical creatures, such as Empusa), city names, and so on.In this case, "empuSa"is really correct. I would not be so categorical about this point and stigmatize the book. This is not the case at all.
Sincerely, Alexander Benediktov.

I will add more information on this issue. Now I have reviewed the books of G. N. Gornostaev (1970) Insects of the USSR from the series "Guides-determinants of the geographer and traveler" - "Empusa", and then - (1998) Insects, from the series" Encyclopedia of Nature of Russia "and (1999) Determinant of orders and families of insects of the fauna of Russia - "Empusa".

This post was edited by Insect Expert - 02/11/2013 11: 48

Likes: 4

11.02.2013 10:37, Насекомовед

Although I have not yet seen this book, I must generally agree with the" spammy " guest. Since, as I understand it, there are also butterflies (as without them), and among the authors I don't even see novice specialists in them, and the guest pointed out one fact of confusion, I think that THIS BOOK SHOULD NOT BE SENT TO CHILDREN'S LIBRARIES! Let it be a beautiful souvenir on the bookshelves of the rich.

The section on butterflies was written by E. Y. Tkacheva, head of the Butterfly section of the Entomology Department of the Moscow Zoo. For this, we are very grateful to her.

To our chagrin, taxonomists in some of the groups we asked for help considered it beneath their dignity to participate in this project, finding nothing attractive in it - neither the publication rating nor the publication fee.

This post was edited by Insect Expert - 02/11/2013 11: 47

Likes: 2

12.02.2013 10:42, Лавр Большаков

Discrepancies with the transcription of Latin names and terms arose from the fact that in the 18th and 19th centuries in Russia the French language was in favor (some aristocrats spoke it better than in Russian). That's why we read Latin automatically in French. From here, we got an abundance of names and terms, where the Latin "a", " u "are written in Russian completely incorrectly as" I "and"yu". Example - first seen-genus Nepticula = nepticula - - - mispronounce "nepticula". Or larva butterfly caterpillar = larva - - - incorrect "larva". Or part of the genitals cucullus = cucullus - - - incorrectly "cucullus".
Perhaps there are cases with reading Latin in German.
And now there are attempts to "read" Latin in English. Example-golubyanka agestis = agestis - - - wrong "egestis" (I don't remember where it was, but it hurt).

Likes: 1

12.02.2013 15:24, Yakovlev

Although I have not yet seen this book, I must generally agree with the" spammy " guest. Since, as I understand it, there are also butterflies (as without them), and among the authors I don't even see novice specialists in them, and the guest pointed out one fact of confusion, I think that THIS BOOK SHOULD NOT BE SENT TO CHILDREN'S LIBRARIES! Let it be a beautiful souvenir on the bookshelves of the rich.

Laurel, well, that's not so bad. The main thing for children is to have an interest. That our Cornelio, Mouhi and other Animal Lives were better than that... There wasn't a damn thing. So much so, to be honest. If there are a couple of types mixed up, this will not make the children hot or cold. The most important thing is that the eyes light up... And if we talk about the rich, I think that they are more interested in buying lifetime editions of Pushkin, collecting old geographical atlases. And a book that anyone can afford (in Barnaul, you can earn three such books a day for a taxi driver, for example) it will not be a rich man's shelf decoration. And an acquisition, if his child is interested in nature. Therefore, such books should be kept in children's libraries as much as possible. And if katokala was confused with kossus, and empusa was called empusa (the discussion of which is simply ridiculous), then this is an unfortunate mistake. The main thing is that children's libraries should be smaller.... But what I won't say, so as not to turn the forum into bedlam.

Likes: 7