[Taxacom] taxonomic names databases

[Richard Pyle]

I did note that I was biased! 

 

:-)

 

Rich

 

 

From: Tony Rees [mailto:tonyrees49 at gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 1:33 PM
To: Richard Pyle
Cc: John Grehan; taxacom
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] taxonomic names databases

 

It's a good question, on which I have some views (which differ somewhat from Richard's), however I would be interested to see what others may suggest too... a lot depends on, I would suggest:

 

  - to what group you are interested in contributing (also whether extant, fossil, or both)

  - what aspects most interest you e.g. names/nomenclatural aspects, taxonomy/phylogeny, ecology, geographic distribution...

  - whether you wish to contribute summaries of "mainstream" views/published literature or personal opinions/new interpretations (the latter may be less welcome than the former)

 

Among my criteria for selecting a relevant vehicle for contributions would be (1) state of completeness already - since why re-do work unnecessarily if others have already done much of it, and (2) current impact/usage of the system - in other words if you put effort in, who will utilise it. In terms of the latter aspect, I would tend to favour databases already contributing to Catalogue of Life (for maximum impact/take-up), which are mainly "controlled units" of endeavour with their own individual contact points, or perhaps PaleoBiology Database for fossils (which is more open access I understand). Just some thoughts...

 

Regards - Tony




Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia

https://about.me/TonyRees