Quote:
Originally Posted by eboat
Hi François,
Why did you publish in scientific journal? It may better for use as scientific work. I just suggest.
|
If I can reply for François, I guess you mean "why you didn't pubblish those articles in a scientific magazine?".
Because there's no difference. The rules of taxonomy only ask that a new species must be published through a document printed in a good amount of copies, easily available to the general pubblic. There's no difference if it appears on a book or on a magazine, its scientific value is exactely the same. Charles Clarke, MacPherson, Robinson and others published new Nepenthes species using books, me and François are the last of a long list. Not to mention the rest of the plant kingdom
The reason why we do this is usually a matter of time. If I discover a new species, I will make my description in 1 month. Then I only need to pubblish it. I look around and I see that the ICPS can publish it in 4 years, the ACPS in 1 year, "X" botanical journal in 6 years, and MacPherson in 3 months, because he's going to pubblish a book very soon. So I go for MacPherson. François pubblished N. bokorensis on the journal of ACPS, because it was the fastest option at the time.
What we actually want is that the description is reviewed (checked) by other Nepenthes experts. I would be worried if a "serious" botanist, but WITHOUT experience in the Nepenthes field, using a "very" scientific magazine, published a new species without having checked his description with some Nepenthes experts!