|
|
Post by wollastoni on Jan 30, 2015 15:31:49 GMT
I have just discovered the description of a new Parnassius species : Parnassius qinghaiensis in the Bulletin de la Société Entomologique de Mulhouse  3 BIG problems here : - description made from one single female that appears to me to be a nice aberration of Parnassius nomion. - the infamous Li Jingke is among the describers. - there is already a described Parnassius simo qinghaiensis... in order to make this paper even worse... In the article, they say that this "work" has been financed by the "National Science Foundation of China"... 2 questions : - what do you think of this chinotype (the 21st century version of japanotype) ? - how come a French periodical, even a small one, can accept to publish such papers... |
|
|
|
Post by deliasfanatic on Jan 30, 2015 19:12:10 GMT
It's sad that a French publication would accept this paper....further proof, unfortunately, that Chinese publications are best assumed worthless by default unless there is a very good reason to think otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jan 30, 2015 20:22:53 GMT
I heard about this a few days ago, and have been trying to get a copy of the paper. Do you have a copy of the whole paper, or just this page? A friend said he saw this page on Facebook (which I don't like to use) which was how I knew about it.
Indeed the name is a junior homonym of Parnassius simo qinghaiensis Sorimachi & Morita (1994), and as such is immediately an unavailable name, regardless of the validity of the taxon.
Also what is the family Parnassinidae? The Chinese like to separate Parnassius into family Parnassiidae, presumably following Chou (1994), but here's a variation on a theme.
It is obvious just from this page that this paper did not pass through even basic peer review, otherwise these simple errors would have been immediately spotted.
As for the second author, the less said the better.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Jan 30, 2015 20:29:31 GMT
I will send you the full article via email, Adam.
The other pages are as bad as the first one.
I have written to this local Entomological Society to complain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jan 30, 2015 20:43:17 GMT
Fantastic, thank you very much.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Jan 30, 2015 21:25:28 GMT
Having examined the paper it appears to be a female of Parnassius mercurius, hence the difference in the sphragis.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Feb 1, 2015 20:38:53 GMT
I sent the paper to Stanislav Kocman, and he agrees that it is Parnassius mercurius. He also said that he caught it at Dawu and that he assigned it to ssp. buddha. He pictured a male on plate 2 of his book.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by xavm (Xavier) on Feb 3, 2015 11:03:37 GMT
I will send you the full article via email, Adam. The other pages are as bad as the first one. I have written to this local Entomological Society to complain.
Would you please also send me a pdf of the paper ? I'd like to discuss with other Parnassinae addicts tomorrow during our ALF meeting.
Thanks in advance Olivier.
Cheers, XavM
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Feb 3, 2015 11:22:41 GMT
Sure, I have just sent it to you.
Say our Parnassius friends hello from me and tell them to join us here.
I miss ALF meetings a lot !
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Feb 3, 2015 15:08:12 GMT
XavM,
Actually Olivier sent me a series of jpg scans of the pages, which I converted to pdf. If you want it as a pdf PM me your e-mail and I will send it to you.
Adam.
|
|
|
|
Post by xavm (Xavier) on Feb 5, 2015 16:43:47 GMT
XavM, Actually Olivier sent me a series of jpg scans of the pages, which I converted to pdf. If you want it as a pdf PM me your e-mail and I will send it to you. Adam.
Thanks Adam, the JPG are fine... and really enough for such a paper !
We discussed yesterday with other Parnassinae addicts who read that 'article', both Emmanuel Zinszner, François Michel, Jean-Claude Weiss, Bernard Turlin.... and all agreed such paper should have never been published... All were in agreement with a female of P. mercurius, ... but assessing the 'authors' expertise, we would have been very surprised this specimen to truly be a new species....
Cheers, XavM
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Feb 5, 2015 17:07:48 GMT
BTW the Mulhouse Society has never taken the time to answer my email asking them some explanations about this "publication".
|
|
|
|
Post by xavm (Xavier) on Feb 5, 2015 18:08:22 GMT
BTW the Mulhouse Society has never taken the time to answer my email asking them some explanations about this "publication".
JCW had notified them about the c...y paper already.
|
|
