[Taxacom] Citizen Science
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Sat Oct 25 17:33:08 CDT 2014
2014
And if you were to make your digital museum freely available online, then a "citizen science" site like iNaturalist would be a convenient repository for it, and we would have an all too rare case of a professional scientist making a really valuable contribution to a public resource.
Stephen
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 26/10/14, Dr Brian Taylor <dr.brian.taylor at ntlworld.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Citizen Science
To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "Michael Wilson" <wilsomichael at gmail.com>
Received: Sunday, 26 October, 2014, 11:10 AM
Can I point you in the direction of
Antweb.org who now have images of ant
type specimens. Although an enormously useful resource to
someone, like
myself, seeking to verify what, without visiting museums or
borrowing the
type specimens (not really desirable for fragile dry mounted
insects), were
often "best guess" identifications of fresh material, the
limitation is that
the excellent quality Antweb images (photographs) not
infrequently do not
show diagnostic characters. On the other hand I have
found it possible to
identify species from field photographs sent to me. The
moral objections to
taking specimens perhaps are misguided as, certainly if one
is trying to
make sound ecological conclusions, or similar, one does, in
my view, need to
know exactly what species one is studying. I write
this from in-depth
experience of such research. Cytotaxonomy studies in
recent years have
verified the existence of cryptic sibling species of
Anopheles which I felt
lay behind an apparent resurgence of malaria transmission in
the Solomon
Islands some 40 years ago. My conclusions had come from
monitoring the time
of man-biting before and after house-spraying operations had
commenced.
In my ant taxonomy studies, I take a series, usually about
20, of simple
photographs from different angles and at different levels of
magnification.
I compile a "photomontage" to illustrate the species and
maintain a digital
museum of most of the specimens, or representatives from
samples of more
than one ant. The actual mounted specimens will all go into
museum
collections but, hopefully, not have to be loaned out and,
so, risk damage
or loss.
Brian
On 25/10/2014 22:26, "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
wrote:
> The issue of photos vs. specimens is a complex and
interesting one. In many
> cases, photos are sufficient to identify a species. So,
if one wants data on
> spatiotemporal distribution, it is a better use of
resources to make a
> collection of digital photos than it is to accession
all those specimens into
> a collection which will require continual curation.
That said, I am not
> necessarily talking about photos of live specimens in
the field, which have
> limited utility. My vision is diagnostic images of dead
specimens, with no
> need to then preserve the specimen*. This is my
approach on NatureWatch NZ.
> Luckily, they, and also iNaturalist and BowerBird have
no "ethical" objections
> to this approach, but some other sites like ProjectNoah
don't appear to be
> open to such modifications of their initial purpose
and
> philosophy.
Stephen
*One objection to this is that taxonomy changes, and
> species get split. However, in practical terms, it
would be rare that good
> diagnostic photos could not be re-evaluated in the
event of taxonomic
> changes.
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 26/10/14,
> Michael Wilson <wilsomichael at gmail.com>
wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom]
> Citizen Science
To: "Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
> <Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Received: Sunday, 26 October, 2014, 2:35 AM
> One aspect of the increasing use of
digital images for recording does not
> seem to have been mentioned in this interesting
discussion
(if it has I
> apologise). Recording using images has become a
substitute
for taking any
> specimens. We often receive images and requests for
identifications based
on
> images- when many groups would require examination of
small characters.
This
> is fine- we point out that we need specimens to
examine
since there
could be
> many species that look almost identical. But many
are morally
opposed to
> taking any specimens - even of small
invertebrates on the
grounds they are
> conservationists- and not 'collectors'.
I do believe that if we cannot
> encourage the 'next
generation' to develop
their skills and interests by
> taking specimens home to
examine under a
microscope then we will have even
> fewer taxonomists than we
have now.
Mike Wilson
Entomology Section
> Dept of Natural Sciences
National Museum of Wales, Cardiff, UK
On Sat, Oct
> 25, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Mike Sadka <sadkamike at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Ah
> Stephen!
>
> You throw out such tempting bait...
>
> But I've promised
> myself I am not rising again!
>
> Cheerio, Mike
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014
> at 10:31 PM, Stephen Thorpe <
> stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
> > wrote:
>
>
> > It an issue of "reading between the lines" and
the
loading of neutral
> >
> facts with negative spin. Also, Dr. Ward set the
Hymenoptera project up
> >
> only to shoot it down for not having associated
protocols that he didn't
> >
> set it up with! I just think that this is a
nonsense paper. It concludes
> >
> the blatantly obvious (i.e., that there are some
geographical and
>
> taxonomic
> > biases in "citizen science" data) from an
analysis
of a very
> limited
> > dataset, and fails to consider how sites like
NatureWatch NZ
> might evolve
> > in such a way as to lessen these biases. One way
would be
> more engagement
> > from professional scientists, but Darren
contributed no
> observations
> > himself, so it all just seems to me to be a bit
of
a
> hatchet job.
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------
> > On Sat, 25/10/14, JF Mate
> <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> >Â Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Citizen
> Science
> >Â To: "Taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> >Â Received:
> Saturday, 25 October, 2014, 1:54
AM
> >
> >Â Continuing Stephen and
> >Â
> thread on Darren Ward and Citizen Science.
I
> >Â am attaching an excerpt of
> his abstract:
> >
> >Â Darren Ward (excerpt from
> >Â abstract of the
> article):
> >
> > “Over the course of 1 year 25 members
> >Â contributed
> 360 records from 186
> >Â taxa,
> >Â including the discovery of several
> introduced species new to
> >Â New
> >Â Zealand. There was a strong
> geographical
> >Â bias to the records, with the
> >Â majority being
> >Â
> based around the major cities. Aculeates
(stinging
> >Â wasps) were
> signi�cantly over-represented
in
> >Â the NatureWatch records.
> >Â Only
> half (55 %) of
> > taxa were identi�ed to species level, with
a
> >Â
> further 28 % at genus level, and 17 %
> > identi�ed above genus level
> >Â
> (family,
> >Â order). Furthermore, the majority (65 %) of
taxa were
> >Â
> recorded only once, and only a few taxa
were
> >Â recorded [5 times (top
>
> >Â records were
> > ‘‘Ichneumonidae’’,
‘‘Hymenoptera’’,
> >Â Anthidium
> manicatum,
> >Â and Apis mellifera). It
> >Â is probable that these same
> biases also
exist
> >Â for many other taxonomic groups in projects
> >Â
> operated by citizen
> >Â scientists lacking set
> >Â protocols. Caution
> should be exercised on
the
> >Â subsequent use, compilation, and analysis
> of
> >Â citizen science,
> >Â especially without prior
> >Â examination of
> records and potential
biases.�
> >
> >
> > (Stephen´s
> >Â opinion
> crudely cut and pasted here) “I
interpret this
> >Â to
> >Â have been a
> deliberate attempt to
> >Â reinforce to the professional
> >Â community the
> > >Â (false) idea that such "citizen science"
projects
> >Â aren't
> >Â
> worth bothering with.�
> >
> >
> >Â Seriously,
> >Â what is the problem
> with what Mr Ward is
saying? If you
> >Â check any of the sites mentioned in
> Taxacom
you
> >Â will discover that
> >Â what he is saying is
> >Â true!
> This is not a criticism of nature
lovers,
> >Â it is a human condition: we
> love
butterflies
> >Â and colourful things and
> >Â dislike small
> >Â
> creepy-crawlies. Why would you expect
different from the
> >Â subset of
> nature macrophotographers?
> >
> >Â Jason
> >
> >
> >
> >Â On 24
> October
> > 2014 09:17, Alastair   Culham
<a.culham at reading.ac.uk>
> >Â
> wrote:
> >Â > For the past year we've been
> >Â running a citizen science
> project to survey
powdery mildew
> >Â species around the UK in a joint
> project
with the Royal
> >Â Horticultural Society -
> >
> http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/crg/powdery-mildew-survey/
> >Â >
> >Â > This has
> resulted in
> >Â a data set of around 200 samples in the
trial year
> including
> >Â 59 different PM species
> >
>
> http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/whiteknightsbiodiversity/campus-species-lists/fungi
> /powdery-mildew-2014/
> > .
> >Â Â Â We are hoping for over 1000
samples next
> season.
> >Â >
> >Â > Samples are
> >Â identified using a combination of
> morphological and
> >Â molecular techniques by a research council
funded
> PhD
> >Â student and the results are emailed back to
the sample
> >Â
> providers as well as posted on our
blogs. Engaging the UK
> >Â public in
> this scheme has allowed a more
widespread sampling
> >Â and allows the
> student doing the work to
focus on lab work
> >Â rather than chasing around
> the UK for
samples.
> >Â >
> >Â > The challenge has
> >Â been to keep the
> survey in people's minds so
that we get
> >Â samples sent on a regular basis
> throughout
the long mildew
> > season. This is a non-trivial job and
> requires a lot of
> >Â forward planning.
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â Ours is a
> small CS scheme compared with
large scale
> >Â monitoring of the UK flora by
> the BSBI which
has a network
> >Â of local (usually highly expert) regional
> recorders and a
> >Â further network of taxonomic experts to back
them up.Â
> The
> >Â common feature of effective CS schemes is
that there is an
> >Â
> ongoing investment in management of them and
close
> >Â monitoring of data
> quality.
> >Â >
> >Â > CS can be highly effective and can be
a
> >Â very
> cost effective way of gathering data if
the scheme is
> > run well. All
> science risks a rubbish
in, rubbish out
> >Â scenario and CS is just as
> sensitive to this
as any other
> >Â science is.
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â
> Alastair
> >Â >
> >Â
____________________________________________
> >Â >
> > >Â > Dr Alastair Culham
> >Â > Centre for Plant Diversity and
> >Â
> Systematics
> >Â > Harborne Building, School
> >Â of Biological Sciences
>
> >Â > University of
> >Â Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AS
> >Â >
> >Â
> U.K.
> >Â >
> >Â > Associate
> >Â Professor of Botany
> >Â > Curator,
> Reading
> >Â University Herbarium (RNG)
> >Â >
> >Â
> ____________________________________________
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â
> ________________________________________
> >Â > From: Taxacom
> [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
> >Â on behalf of Stephen Thorpe
> [stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
> >Â > Sent: 23 October 2014 21:35
> >Â > To:
> KenWalker; John Grehan
> >Â > Cc: Taxacom
> >Â > Subject:
> >Â Re:
> [Taxacom] De-extinction & Rhachistia
aldabrae
> >Â >
> >Â > Ken may be a
> little
> >Â bit oversensitive, given that he probably
has to constantly
>
> >Â battle the indifference to (and sometimes
obstruction of)
> >Â citizen
> science, by entomologist colleagues.
In my view,
> >Â biodiversity recording
> sites like Project
Noah, iSpot,
> >Â iNaturalist, BowerBird, NatureWatch NZ,
> etc.
are not
> >Â actually all that useful *as initially
conceived* (photos
> in
> >Â the field of live organisms), but can evolve
into something
> >Â
> far more useful. I agree that there is not
much point in
> >Â thousands of
> records of monarch butterflies,
and no little
> >Â brown micro moths. For
> some idea of my
vision for these
> >Â biodiversity recording sites, I invite
> you
to browse my own
> >Â 2489 contributions to NatureWatch NZ, here:
> >
> http://naturewatch.org.nz/observations/stho002
> >Â >
> >Â > Stephen
> >Â
> >
> >Â >
> >Â
--------------------------------------------
> >Â > On Fri,
> 24/10/14, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> >Â wrote:
> >Â >
> >Â >Â
> Subject:
> >Â Re: [Taxacom] De-extinction & Rhachistia
aldabrae
> >Â >Â To:
> "Walker, Ken" <kwalker at museum.vic.gov.au>
> >Â >Â Cc: "Taxacom"
> <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> >Â >Â Received: Friday, 24 October,
2014,
> 2:51
> >Â AM
> >Â >
> >Â >Â Ken,
> >Â >
> >Â >Â Admittedly I only
> >Â
> read postings in a fragmentary way and I
> >Â >Â know I sometimes
> >Â >
>
> >Â miss items, but I am confused by your
reference to Jason
> >Â >Â Mate
> saying the
> >Â >
> >Â the efforts of citizen science can be
dismissed as
> "
> >Â are
> >Â >Â taking pictures of
> >Â >Â "bugs": bigger, smaller,
> red,
> >Â blue or yellow." What I read
> >Â >Â was
> >Â that he said
> >Â
> >Â that "The decline
> >Â in "natural history" amateurs is global
> >Â >Â
> and cannot be
> >Â >
> >Â compensated by the explosion of
macrophotography
> since
> >Â they
> >Â >Â (mostly) are
> >Â >Â taking pictures of "bugs":
>
> >Â bigger, smaller, red, blue or
> >Â >
> >Â yellow." This made
> >Â >Â no
> reference
> >Â to 'citizen science' and I did not see any
> >Â >Â
> implication of
> >Â >
> >Â such. It was only a criticism of a
particular
> mode of
> >Â >Â information gathering
> >Â >Â or sharing. I would be
> grateful
> >Â therefore for how you made
> >Â >Â that link
> >Â the
> >Â
> >Â way you did.
> >Â >
> >Â >Â John Grehan
> >Â >
> >Â >Â On Wed, Oct 22,
> > >Â 2014 at 9:04 PM, Walker, Ken <kwalker at museum.vic.gov.au>
> >Â >Â wrote:
> > >Â >
> >Â >Â > Hi Jason,
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â >Â > I totally disagree
> with
> >Â your assessment of citizen
> >Â >Â science
> >Â being on the
>
> >Â >Â > decline and that
> >Â the efforts of citizen science can be
> >Â >
> > >Â dismissed as " are
> >Â >Â > taking
> >Â pictures of "bugs": bigger,
> smaller, red,
blue
> >Â >Â or yellow."
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â >Â > Here is
> Australia, we have
> >Â a citizen science website
> >Â >Â called
> >Â
> BowerBird
> >Â >Â > which is a socially
> >Â interactive website somewhat
> like
> >Â >Â the
> >Â northern
> >Â >Â > hemisphere equivalents
> >Â of
> Project Noah, iNaturalist and
> >Â >
> > iSpot. For me, the
> >Â >Â >
> quality of
> >Â a citizen science website is whether or not
> >Â >Â the data
> it
> >Â >Â >
> >Â generates is on-shared with national or
international
>
> >Â >Â biodiversity
> >Â >Â >
> >Â databases.
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â > Let me
> give you one
BowerBird
> >Â example that came in this
> > > month. A
>
> >Â citizen
> >Â >Â > science person submitted
> >Â an image of a
> >Â >Â
> ladybeetle. He had
> >Â tried to
> >Â >Â > identify it himself but
> >Â
> could not place the
> > > species. In
> >Â Australia, we have
> >Â >Â >
> a wonderful
> >Â CSIRO website displaying all known extant
> >Â >Â
> Australian ladybeetle
> > > > species. The BowerBird
image did
> >Â not
> match any of
> >Â >Â the images on the
> >Â >Â > diagnostic website.Â
So,
> we sent
> >Â the image to the
> >Â >Â BMNH ladybeetle
> >Â expert
> >Â >Â
> > who came back with the
> >Â statement "Back from the
> >Â >
> >Â Dead".Â
> The species
> >Â >Â >
> >Â photographed was presumed to be extinct as
it
> had not
> >Â >Â been seen or recorded
> > > > since 1940. The story
of
> this
> >Â citizen science
> >Â >Â find was told in one
> >Â of our
> >Â >Â
> > national newspapers:
> >Â >Â >
> >
>
> http://www.theage.com.au/technology/sci-tech/extinct-ladybird-back-from-the-de
> ad-20141014-115u4j.html
> >Â >Â > (where you can see an image
of the
> >Â
> beetle).
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â > To me, the essence of science is to
> observe and ask
> > > questions. What
> >Â >
> >Â > better way is there
> than to have
thousands of
> >Â "natural
> >Â >Â history amateur
> >Â >Â >
> eyes" documenting spatial
and
> >Â temporal data for the
> >Â >Â
> Australian
> >Â (swap
> >Â >Â > Australia for any other
> >Â country)
> biota. BowerBird
> >Â >Â has
> >Â discovered new
> >Â >Â > species and
>
> > helped to track invasive species. The
> >Â >Â exotic carder bee
> >Â >
> > >Â > (Afranthidium (Immanthidium)
repetitum)
was first
> >Â >Â reported in
> Brisbane in
> > > > 2000. By 2007, it had
been
> > recorded south
>
> >Â >Â in Sydney but since
> >Â the Sydney
> >Â >Â > records no further
> >Â
> distribution extensions had been
> >Â >
> > recorded. Then in
> >Â >Â >
> February and
> >Â March 2014, two amateurs noticed a
> >Â >
> >Â "strange
> bee" in their
> >Â >Â >
> > garden. They photographed their
strange bee
> and
> >Â >Â posted the images on
> >Â >Â > BowerBird with the question
> >Â
> "Bee ID?". We bee
> >Â >
> >Â "experts" immediately
> >Â >Â >
> >Â
> recognised it as the South African carder
bee and the
> >Â >Â records came
> from
> >Â >
> >Â > hundreds of kilometres north of
Brisbane and
> >Â
> hundreds
> >Â >Â south of Sydney - on
> >Â >Â > the state of Victoria's
>
> > border. Australia has
> >Â >Â many exotic
> >Â "sleeper weeds"
> >Â >Â
> > but
> >Â they remain in small numbers as they lack
their
> >Â >Â
> effective pollinator.
> >Â >Â > The spread of any exotic
pollinator
> >Â
> needs to be
> >Â >Â monitored and watched for
> >Â a
> >Â >Â > possible
> explosion of a
> >Â sleeper weed. It was citizen
> >Â >Â science
> >Â who
> alerted us
> >Â >Â > to this alarming
> >Â spread.
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â
> > BowerBird "favourites" are often
created by
> >Â an "expert"
> >Â >Â
> mentoring
> >Â "natural
> >Â >Â > history amateur
> > eyes" . One such
> case is the
> >Â >
> >Â humble but extraordinary life
> >Â >Â >
> >Â
> styled and bizarrely coloured flatworms.
> >Â >Â Australia has only one
> flatworm
> >Â >Â > expert located in north
> > Queensland. However, he
>
> >Â >Â has
> >Â inspired many
> >Â >Â > BowerBird members
> >Â from around
> Australia to roll back
> >Â >
> >Â logs in search of
> >Â >Â > these
> >Â
> flatworms. The expert identifies each
> >Â >Â flatworm image posted to
> >Â
> >Â > BowerBird but he adds
stories about
> >Â how the scientific
> >Â >Â
> name was derived
> >Â and
> >Â >Â > about the species
> >Â behaviour.Â
> There are now almost
> >Â >Â 50
> >Â BowerBird members on
> >Â >Â > the
>
> >Â Flatworm project who have image captured
many of
> >Â >Â Australia's
> flatworm
> > > > species. The expert
has told me
> >Â that for many
>
> >Â >Â species, the
> >Â BowerBird
> >Â >Â > images were his first
> >Â live
> images for many species - he
> >Â >
> >Â usually sees them
> >Â >Â > as
> pickled
> > individuals. The expert has also
> >Â >
> >Â requested and
> been able to get
> >Â >Â >
> >Â these amateurs to collect and send him
> specimens for
> > > DNA analysis. If you
> >Â >Â > have never seen a
> flatworm
or want
> >Â to read something
> >Â >Â about them, then
> >Â I
>
> >Â >Â > recommend the flatworm
> >Â project:
> >Â >Â >
> http://www.bowerbird.org.au/projects/1633/sightings
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â >
>
> >Â Finally, the Australian GBIF node is ALA
(Atlas of
> >Â >Â Living
> Australia).
> >Â >Â > BowerBird went live in May
2013 and
> >Â there are
> automatic
> >Â >Â weekly data
> >Â >Â > (images. Identifications,
> >Â
> spatrila/temporal etc)
> >Â >Â uploads to
> >Â ALA.
> >Â >Â > Currently,
> there are almost
> >Â 11,000 BowerBird records on
> >Â >Â ALA (to
> >Â see
> the
> >Â >Â > spread of records from
> >Â around Australia see:
> >Â >Â >
> > >
>
> http://biocache.ala.org.au/occurrences/search?qÚta_resource_uid:dr893#tab_ma
> pView
> > > > ). This represents
about a 60%
> >Â identification
> >Â
> >Â success rate for
> >Â images that
> >Â >Â > you describe as
> >Â
> "pictures of "bugs": bigger, smaller,
> >Â >Â red, blue or yellow."
> >Â >Â
> >
> >Â >Â > New
> >Â species have been nominated, new
distributions have
>
> >Â >Â been recorded, new
> >Â >Â > stories have been told about
the
> >Â
> Australian fauna, new
> >Â >Â friendships
> >Â have
> >Â >Â > been made and
> these new
> >Â "friends" now go out together
> >Â >Â on their own
> >Â >Â
> >
> >Â photographic BioBlitzes and on-share their
finds to
> >Â >Â
> BowerBird to ALA to
> > > > GBIF. I'm happy with
this
> >Â deal !!
> >Â
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â > I am sure these stories here can be
repeated for
> >Â
> >Â Project Noah, iNaturalist
> >Â >Â > and iSpot.
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> For me, citizen science is
> >Â on the up not the
> >Â >Â decline.
> >Â
> Getting
> >Â >Â > "professional"
> >Â scientists to engage with this "new"
> > >Â >Â data source is the next
> >Â >Â > "challenge".
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> Best
> >Â Ken
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> >Â -----Original Message-----
> >Â >Â
> > From:
> >Â Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
> >Â >Â On
> Behalf Of JF
> >Â >
> >Â > Mate
> >Â >Â > Sent: Thursday, 23
> >Â October
> 2014 2:14 AM
> >Â >Â > To:
> >Â Taxacom
> >Â >Â > Subject: Re: [Taxacom]
>
> >Â De-extinction & Rhachistia
> >Â >
> >Â aldabrae
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â
> > Hi Bob,
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â > I agree the scale is
altogether
> >Â
> different but even in
> >Â >Â densely
> >Â populated
> >Â >Â > areas in
> Australia
> >Â even basic invertebrate biodiversity
> >Â >
> >Â knowledge
> is
> >Â >Â > lacking. The
> >Â decline in "natural history" amateurs is
>
> >Â >Â global and cannot be
> >Â >Â > compensated by the explosion
of
> >Â
> macrophotography since
> >Â >Â they (mostly)
> >Â are
> >Â >Â > taking
> pictures of
> >Â "bugs": bigger, smaller, red, blue
> >Â >Â or yellow. If
> you
> >Â >
> > > don´t know what you are photographing
then it is
> >Â
> like
> > > it doesn´t exist. For
> >Â >Â > Europe (with some
exceptions)
> the
> >Â decline may not be as
> >Â >Â damaging. The
> >Â fauna
> >Â >Â >
> is well known and there
> >Â are plenty of guides and keys
> >Â >Â that
>
> >Â digital
> >Â >Â > enthusiasts could use.
> >Â The goal here has at least
> been
> >Â >
> >Â partially achieved.
> >Â >Â > In
> >Â Australia, other
> than butterflies and a
couple of
> >Â >Â other popular groups
> >Â >Â > you
> are out of luck.
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> >Â Cristian. Spain is in a similar
> (albeit not
as extreme)
> >Â >Â situation to
> >Â >Â >
> >Â Australia.
> High biodiversity, incomplete
knowledge but
> >Â >Â a declining body of
>
> >Â >Â > amateurs (and legislation
that
> > doesn´t help either).
> >Â >Â
> >
> >Â >Â > Best
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â > Jason
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> >Â
> >
> >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â >Â > This e-mail is solely for
>
> >Â the named addressee and may
> >Â >Â be
> >Â confidential. You
> >Â >Â >
> should only
> >Â read, disclose, transmit, copy, distribute,
> >Â >Â act in
> reliance on
> >Â >Â > or commercialise the
contents if
> >Â you are
> authorised to
> >Â >Â do so. If you
> >Â are
> >Â >Â > not the intended
> recipient
> >Â of this e-mail, please
> >Â >Â notify
> >Â mailto:
> >Â >Â
> > postmaster at museum.vic.gov.au
> >Â >Â by email immediately, or notify
the
> > >Â sender
> >Â >Â > and then destroy any copy
> >Â of this message. Views
> > >Â >Â expressed in
> >Â this email
> >Â >Â > are those of the
> >Â
> individual sender, except where
> >Â >
> >Â specifically stated to be
> >Â
> >Â > those
> >Â of an officer of Museum Victoria. Museum
Victoria
> >Â >Â
> does not represent,
> >Â >Â > warrant or guarantee that
the
> >Â integrity
> of this
> >Â >Â communication has
> >Â been
> >Â >Â > maintained nor that
> it is
> >Â free from errors, virus or
> >Â >
> >Â interference.
> >Â >Â >
> > >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> >Â
_______________________________________________
>
> >Â >Â > Taxacom Mailing List
> >Â >Â > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >Â >Â >
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >Â >Â > The
> Taxacom Archive back to
1992
> >Â may be searched at:
> >Â >Â >
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >Â >
> >Â Celebrating 27 years
> of Taxacom in 2014.
> >Â >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â
> _______________________________________________
> >Â >Â Taxacom Mailing List
> > >Â >Â Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >Â >Â
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >Â >Â The
> Taxacom Archive back to 1992
may be
> >Â searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >Â >
> >Â >Â Celebrating 27
> >Â years of
> Taxacom in 2014.
> >Â >
> >Â >
> >Â
> _______________________________________________
> >Â > Taxacom Mailing List
> > >Â >
> >Â Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >Â >
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >Â > The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992 may
be
> >Â searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> >Â >
> >Â > Celebrating 27 years
> >Â of Taxacom in 2014.
> >Â >
> >Â
> _______________________________________________
> >Â > Taxacom Mailing List
> > >Â >
> >Â Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >Â >
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >Â > The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992 may
be
> >Â searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> >Â >
> >Â > Celebrating 27 years
> >Â of Taxacom in 2014.
> >Â
> _______________________________________________
> >Â Taxacom Mailing List
>
> >Â Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >Â
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >Â The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992 may be
> >Â searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> >
> >Â Celebrating 27 years of
> >Â Taxacom in 2014.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992 may be searched
at:
> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> >
> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
>
> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>
> _______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom
> Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing
> List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/list
> info/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list