“Run for your lives! End of the World!” – Electronic publication of new plant names

Knapp, Sandra; Paton, Alan; Challis, Katherine; Nicolson, Nicola

doi:10.1002/tax.594001

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We can therefore conclude that one of the more modest hopes - that e-publication is seen as part of the normal publication process - has been realised. In fact, we did not need to run for our lives [ 15 ]: the issues imagined have not flooded us with problems different to those perennially associated with nomenclature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A Special Committee was established at the Vienna Congress to examine the issues, with the mandate to prepare proposals for the next IBC in Melbourne in 2011 [ 13 ]. Over the six years between the XVII (Vienna) and XVIII (Melbourne) Congresses, publication rules were challenged by Knapp [ 14 ], who published new species in PLoS ONE - an on-line only journal - and complied with letter of the Code by depositing ten offprints in botanical libraries [ 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This posed a significant cataloguing and preservation challenge for libraries, who felt they might be facing a deluge of single- or few-page paper copies of papers describing new species [ 15 ] (also see Doug Holland conference presentation: “Libraries and the Code: The changing role of botanical libraries in the age of electronic publication.”, Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) 2011). Proposals put forward by the Special Committee on Electronic Publication [ 16 ] to allow e-publication under the then “botanical code” were accepted overwhelmingly at the Nomenclature Section of the XVIII IBC in Melbourne Australia in July 2011 [ 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impact of e-publication changes in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code, 2012) - did we need to “run for our lives”?

Nicolson¹,

Challis²,

Tucker³

et al. 2017

BMC Evol Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAt the Nomenclature Section of the XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne, Australia (IBC), the botanical community voted to allow electronic publication of nomenclatural acts for algae, fungi and plants, and to abolish the rule requiring Latin descriptions or diagnoses for new taxa. Since the 1st January 2012, botanists have been able to publish new names in electronic journals and may use Latin or English as the language of description or diagnosis.ResultsUsing data on vascular plants from the International Plant Names Index (IPNI) spanning the time period in which these changes occurred, we analysed trajectories in publication trends and assessed the impact of these new rules for descriptions of new species and nomenclatural acts. The data show that the ability to publish electronically has not “opened the floodgates” to an avalanche of sloppy nomenclature, but concomitantly neither has there been a massive expansion in the number of names published, nor of new authors and titles participating in publication of botanical nomenclature.ConclusionsThe e-publication changes introduced in the Melbourne Code have gained acceptance, and botanists are using these new techniques to describe and publish their work. They have not, however, accelerated the rate of plant species description or participation in biodiversity discovery as was hoped.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12862-017-0961-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of e-publication changes in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code, 2012) - did we need to “run for our lives”?

Nicolson¹,

Challis²,

Tucker³

et al. 2017

BMC Evol Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New plant taxa published recently in an entirely electronic journal, PLoS One ( Knapp 2010 ) accomplished effective publication of the names therein by the authors themselves taking care to print the articles and send them to various libraries to provide paper archiving. It is obvious that such a policy intended to satisfy the Codes is not sustainable on the long term and makes changes and amendments to both Codes like those that have been suggested recently more topical and urgent ( Knapp et al 2007 , Knapp and Wright 2010 , Knapp et al 2010 , Wheeler and Krell 2007 ). Amendments to the Codes are currently under active discussion in both the zoological and botanical/mycological communities (e.g., Availability & electronic publication 2010 , Chapman et al in press ).…”

Section: E-publish or Perish? Print And Electronic Publications Of Nomentioning

confidence: 99%

Fast, linked, and open – the future of taxonomic publishing for plants: launching the journal PhytoKeys

Penev¹,

Kress²,

Knapp³

et al. 2010

PHYTOKEYS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper describes the focus, scope and the rationale of PhytoKeys, a newly established, peer-reviewed, open-access journal in plant systematics. PhytoKeys is launched to respond to four main challenges of our time: (1) Appearance of electronic publications as amendments or even alternatives to paper publications; (2) Open Access (OA) as a new publishing model; (3) Linkage of electronic registers, indices and aggregators that summarize information on biological species through taxonomic names or their persistent identifiers (Globally Unique Identifiers or GUIDs; currently Life Science Identifiers or LSIDs); (4) Web 2.0 technologies that permit the semantic markup of, and semantic enhancements to, published biological texts. The journal will pursue cutting-edge technologies in publication and dissemination of biodiversity information while strictly following the requirements of the current International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN).

show abstract

“…The appearance of the journal was concomitant with lively discussions on the validity of nomenclatural acts published electronically (Knapp and Wright 2010, Knapp et al 2010, Penev et al 2010, Chapman et al 2010). At the XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne in July 2011 (IBC 2011) these discussions culminated in the decision to amend the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature to allow electronic-only publishing of new taxa.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovative electronic publication in plant systematics: PhytoKeys and the changes to the “Botanical Code” accepted at the XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne

Kress¹,

Penev²

2011

PHYTOKEYS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PhytoKeys was established less than a year ago in response to four main publication challenges of our time: (1) the appearance of electronic publications as amendments or even alternatives to paper publications; (2) Open Access (OA) as a new publishing model; (3) the linkage of electronic registers, indices, and aggregators, which summarize information on biological species through taxonomic names or their persistent identifiers; and (4) Web 2.0 technologies, which permit the semantic markup of, and semantic enhancements to, published biological texts. The appearance of the journal was concomitant with lively discussions on the validity of nomenclatural acts published electronically (Knapp and Wright 2010, Knapp et al. 2010, Penev et al. 2010, Chapman et al. 2010). At the XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne in July 2011 (IBC 2011) these discussions culminated in the decision to amend the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature to allow electronic-only publishing of new taxa. Even before the end of the Congress and formal acceptance of the changes PhytoKeys was able to publish a report on the main outcomes of the Nomenclature Section on electronic publishing (Miller et al. 2011)

show abstract

“Run for your lives! End of the World!” – Electronic publication of new plant names

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

Impact of e-publication changes in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code, 2012) - did we need to “run for our lives”?

Impact of e-publication changes in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code, 2012) - did we need to “run for our lives”?

Fast, linked, and open – the future of taxonomic publishing for plants: launching the journal PhytoKeys

Innovative electronic publication in plant systematics: PhytoKeys and the changes to the “Botanical Code” accepted at the XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About