[ECOLOG-L] New online community for open peer-review in science
Dear Ecolog readers, Academic publishing continues to evolve. Science Open Reviewedhttps://science-open-reviewed.com is a brand new model - with novel features that no one else is trying - a unique platform for building and serving an online community of science researchers: - Where authors can arrange to get their papers peer-reviewed openly, quickly and expertly by the best reviewers, without the biases and inefficiencies that plague the traditional blind peer-review system; - Where reviewers can be rewarded with fair compensation, recognition, and reputation metrics; - Where researchers can disseminate their discoveries rapidly, without the gate-keeping elitism fueled by competition between journals for impact factor status; - Where researchers can disseminate their discoveries affordably, without draining research and library budgets to feed the profits of commercial publishers that charge exorbitant prices for authors fees and reader access. - Where journal editors can shop for papers that are already peer-reviewed and ready for publication. Learn more about: The SciOR Missionhttps://science-open-reviewed.com/?page_id=8 What SciOR Doeshttps://science-open-reviewed.com/?page_id=10 How SciOR Workshttps://science-open-reviewed.com/?page_id=12 Benefits of SciORhttps://science-open-reviewed.com/?page_id=14 SciOR is based at Queen's University, Canada, and is now open for free registration. Start your online profile today to advertise your services as a reviewer, and discover how SciOR works. When you have a paper ready for review, you can post it and take control of inviting the best reviewers. Then invite journal editors to view your revised paper and its reviews, and fast-track it to a published peer-reviewed article. SciOR is also connected with Proceedings of Science Open Reviewedhttp://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/ProcSciOR/ , a new open access electronic journal published at Queen's University. Check out our new Twitter pagehttps://twitter.com/_SciOR with a growing list of followers! With best wishes, Lonnie ___ Lonnie Aarssen Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada L7L 3N6
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Other list serves like Ecolog
Evoldir (and others like it) is a great site for bulletins, but as I indicated, I was interested in open interactive discussion lists, like ECOLOG, that allow any list member to post messages for distribution to the entire list. From the Evoldir homepage: EvolDir is for bulletins not discussions. On Apr 30, 2013, at 7:10 PM, Mitch Cruzan cru...@pdx.edu wrote: You left off the Evolution Directory: Evoldir http://evol.mcmaster.ca/evoldir.html On 4/30/2013 5:38 PM, Lonnie Aarssen wrote: Here is what I learned from member replies (thanks!), and from some other digging regarding listservs like ECOLOG. Specifically, I was seeking open interactive discussion lists (like ECOLOG), that allow any list member to post messages for distribution to the entire list. Many are hosted by universities / research institutes, for example: https://listserv.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A0=ENTOMO-L http://www.lsoft.com/scripts/wl.exe?SL1=MAMMAL-LH=SI- LISTSERV.SI.EDU https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/marmam http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=SUSTAG http://www.resecon.org/pages/1/index.htm https://list.auckland.ac.nz/sympa/info/aliens-l https://www.csun.edu/~hcbio028/bryonet.html http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom Some are associated with societies, and special interest networks, for example: http://www.entsoc.org/resources/Systematics_Resources/People https://list.auckland.ac.nz/sympa/info/math-smbnet http://asab.nottingham.ac.uk/web/mailinglist.php http://www.mycology.net/ Two sources look particularly useful for searching based on subject/topics/keywords: (1) Catalog of Listserv lists from L-Soft: http://www.lsoft.com/catalist.html (2) Catalog of forum lists from The Science Forum: http://www.thescienceforum.com/ Cheers, Lonnie Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617 -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG- l...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Lonnie Aarssen Sent: April-19-13 1:44 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Other list serves like Ecolog Dear Ecolog, Does anyone know about other open list serves like Ecolog (i.e. that do not require a society membership) connected with any other science disciplines? Based on responses, I would be happy to compile and report a list of these. Cheers, Lonnie
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Other list serves like Ecolog
Here is what I learned from member replies (thanks!), and from some other digging regarding listservs like ECOLOG. Specifically, I was seeking open interactive discussion lists (like ECOLOG), that allow any list member to post messages for distribution to the entire list. Many are hosted by universities / research institutes, for example: https://listserv.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A0=ENTOMO-L http://www.lsoft.com/scripts/wl.exe?SL1=MAMMAL-LH=SI-LISTSERV.SI.EDU https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/marmam http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=SUSTAG http://www.resecon.org/pages/1/index.htm https://list.auckland.ac.nz/sympa/info/aliens-l https://www.csun.edu/~hcbio028/bryonet.html http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom Some are associated with societies, and special interest networks, for example: http://www.entsoc.org/resources/Systematics_Resources/People https://list.auckland.ac.nz/sympa/info/math-smbnet http://asab.nottingham.ac.uk/web/mailinglist.php http://www.mycology.net/ Two sources look particularly useful for searching based on subject/topics/keywords: (1) Catalog of Listserv lists from L-Soft: http://www.lsoft.com/catalist.html (2) Catalog of forum lists from The Science Forum: http://www.thescienceforum.com/ Cheers, Lonnie Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web: http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax: 613-533-6617 -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG- l...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Lonnie Aarssen Sent: April-19-13 1:44 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Other list serves like Ecolog Dear Ecolog, Does anyone know about other open list serves like Ecolog (i.e. that do not require a society membership) connected with any other science disciplines? Based on responses, I would be happy to compile and report a list of these. Cheers, Lonnie
[ECOLOG-L] Other list serves like Ecolog
Dear Ecolog, Does anyone know about other open list serves like Ecolog (i.e. that do not require a society membership) connected with any other science disciplines? Based on responses, I would be happy to compile and report a list of these. Cheers, Lonnie
Re: [ECOLOG-L] A response to E.O. Wilson's opinion about math
“It is by logic that we prove, but by intuition that we discover. To know how to criticize is good, to know how to create is better” - H. Poincaré (1908) Science and Method (Part II. Ch. 2, p. 129). Some of the best science results when someone excels in both quantitative skill and creativity. But this has always been (and always will be) an extremely rare breed - an outlier. Intrinsic trade-offs usually limit the frequency of phenotypes that are good at everything. Wilson of course knows this, and so his piece was not a prescription for how to become an outlier (there is none). Instead, it was a prescription for how to be a successful scientist, while knowing that the vast majority of aspiring science students could never - in their wildest dreams - expect or even hope to be a super-star outlier. More commonly, many successful scientists tend to be more quantitatively skilled than creative, while many others tend to be more creative than quantitatively skilled. Often, these two types find themselves working together in teams to produce good science, and this is increasingly important as the exponential growth of knowledge and technology continues, and thus it becomes increasingly more difficult for someone to be an outlier - good at everything. The bottom line is that science progresses best through pluralism, collaboration and teamwork - not by dogmatism, egoism and elitism. Progress then involves recognizing that there are different kinds of people - with different minds and different strengths - that can make valuable contributions to science. That is the central message from Wilson’s article, which echoes the great mathematician, Poincare, above. It is especially important that creative people not be discouraged from pursuing science because they might not have the sharpest mathematical inclination. They can easily find plenty of others to work with that do, while at the same time learning enough mathematics to collaborate effectively. Lonnie Aarssen Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG- l...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely Sent: April-10-13 11:20 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] A response to E.O. Wilson's opinion about math Wilson did not say mathematics is not important. He said that one can make meaningful contributions to science without being expert at advanced mathematics. He also did mention collaboration and stated that he sought such collaboration in his own work, which he stated benefited from his doing so. David McNeely Thomas J. Givnish givn...@facstaff.wisc.edu wrote: I heartily agree. Easy for EO to say math isn't important; he doesn't mention his collaboration with the mathematically inclined Robert Macarthur, leading to the theory of island biogeography. And the problems with Wilson's foray into group selection theory are testimony to the kinds of problems people without strong math skills can get into, especially if they're seduced by mathematicians without a solid ecological/evolutionary grounding. Yes, it might be true that most mathematicians lack strong ecological intuition. But so do many ecologists! There is a substantial list of people we could cite who have made major contributions to ecology and evolutionary biology in no small part because they do have a strong mathematical background. Why aren't they mentioned? Or don't they exist, in Wilson's worldview? In Wilson's case, math was not his strong suit; arguably, writing was. So should we advise students NOT to enter ecology if their writing isn't up to Pulitzer caliber? I hope not. People can bring a variety of skills to bear to make a contribution in almost any field. Writing off mathematical ability, as Wilson does, doesn't help, and trivializes the profound insights that mathematically savvy, ecologically well-grounded scientists have provided. And it reinforces the delusion that many people aren't good at math, when in fact they didn't have a good set of math teachers, or took the math at the wrong stage of their development. Thomas J. Givnish Henry Allan Gleason Professor of Botany University of Wisconsin givn...@wisc.edu http://botany.wisc.edu/givnish/Givnish/Welcome.html On 04/09/13, Mitch Cruzan wrote: I couldn't agree more - it can only help. On 4/9/2013 6:22 PM, David Inouye wrote: Don't Listen to E.O. Wilson Math can help you in almost any career. There's no reason to fear it. http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/04/e _o_wilson_is_wrong_about_math_and_science.htmlhttp://www.slate.com /articles/health_and_science/science/2013/04/e_o_wilson_is_wrong_ab out_math_and_science.html -- -- David McNeely
[ECOLOG-L] NEW IDEAS
Everyone has ideas, and sometimes they have potential to make a significant impact on science. If you have a good idea, why not publish it? If you don't, someone else soon will. IDEAS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION provides a peer-reviewed, open-access venue for this. Volume 5 (2012) for IEE is now complete and can be viewed here: http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE/issue/view/425. IEE welcomes manuscript submissions from researchers in all career stages - from the senior scientist who may discover some sage insight derived from a long history of experience, to the new graduate student who may arrive at a novel idea, generated by a fresh open mind working on a research project proposal. Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617
[ECOLOG-L] OPEN PEER REVIEW
Dear Ecolog, Announcing a new model for open peer review - launching soon from Queen's University: Science Open Reviewed: An online community connecting authors with reviewers for journalshttp://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE/article/view/4475/4524. science-open-reviewed.comhttp://science-open-reviewed.com/ provides AUTHORS with: * a personal page for posting titles/abstracts of papers that authors wish to have peer reviewed; * a registry listing of available reviewers for authors to contact to negotiate a review; * liaison for arranging any negotiated reviewer remuneration, to ensure that reviews are well executed and timely; * registration of their peer-reviewed papers (and their reviews), ready for perusal by journal editors; * optional publication of their registered peer-reviewed papers-for a nominal author fee of $100 (waived for 2013)-in Proceedings of Science Open Reviewedhttp://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/ProcSciOR/. science-open-reviewed.comhttp://science-open-reviewed.com/ provides REVIEWERS with: * a personal page for advertising their reviewing services; * a reputation economy, by publishing a record of previous reviewing service; * a listing of posted papers available for reviewing, and author contact information for making an offer to review; * liaison for arranging any negotiated remuneration for reviewing - as fair and motivating compensation for professional service; * registration of their reviews linked to registered papers that are ready for perusal by journal editors; * optional and free publication of their peer-reviewed reviewer commentary/response papers in Proceedings of Science Open Reviewedhttp://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/ProcSciOR/. science-open-reviewed.comhttp://science-open-reviewed.com/ provides EDITORS with: * a registry listing of peer-reviewed papers-and their reviews-for which offers can be made to authors for publication in the editors' journals. Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617
[ECOLOG-L] Are peer-review filters optimal?
Dear Ecolog, Pre-publication peer review is essential for the progress of science. But how rigorous should peer-review filters be? They can range from zero, i.e. publish without peer review, to the highest level where publication is granted for 'only the best of the best', as judged by peer review. Is the current practice optimal for the dissemination of discovery in ecology and evolution? A simple optimality model can be used to generate needed conversation for these important questions. If you are interested in this topic, please see the editorial recently published in Ideas in Ecology and Evolution (http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE/article/view/4322/4311), where you can also post your comments in response online. Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecology (the journal) stalled?
I wonder if Don Strong would explain to us why Ecology is still publishing on paper? No ecologist that I know reads paper journals anymore, and hasn't for years. And libraries everywhere are cancelling their paper subscriptions and supporting only electronic journal subscriptions. In the news this week we also learned that Encyclopedia Britannica has decided to publish its last print edition this year, with only online editions available in the future. Is it not time for Ecology to do the same? The advantages seem obvious. If Ecology has a limited number of pages that the ESA can afford to publish, then why not simply break free from this limitation by publishing electronically only? The ecological community could then benefit from a greater number of high quality Ecology articles. At 06:00 PM 14/03/2012, you wrote: Don Strong, Editor in Chief of Ecology replies. Dear Eco Anonym: It is my belief that there is no best journal. One submits to the journal that is most appropriate for the work. There are no differences in editorial standards between Ecology and Ecosphere. Both give two reviews to authors of papers that the editors chose to have reviewed. Ecosphere asks reviewers to be quick and to sacrifice length and detail in the review for speed. Ecology continues its tradition of lengthy, detailed reviews. The rejection rate of reviewed articles at Ecosphere is roughly the same as that at Ecology. Ecology receives many more submissions than the ESA can publish on paper. It is not distinct from other journals in the practice of sending only a fraction of submissions out for review. For more than a decade, Ecology has practiced rejection following editorial review for a substantial fraction of submitted manuscripts. Today this fraction is roughly equal to what it was five years ago. Decisions on which manuscript to review follow the examination of every submission by four editors. Because Ecology is a traditional journal, published on paper, it has but a limited number of pages that the ESA can afford to publish. Excessive length of submissions is a major reason that our editors reject after editorial review. Because Ecosphere is not published on paper, it has far less cost per unit length. Ecosphere is the new open access journal of the ESA. The first issue appeared in July 2010. Before Ecosphere, the ESA had to say to all of the submissions rejected following editorial review, we cant help you. Now, with Ecosphere, the ESA says, Welcome to Ecosphere. It is open access; anyone can read your paper in Ecosphere. No subscription required. As stated above, Ecosphere has much less length limitations than Ecology. Ecosphere is a huge success. It has received an increasing number of submissions; the number is now above 30 per month. Ecosphere has published lots of papers and its authors include some of the most prominent ecologists in the world. Check out Ecosphere, http://www.esajournals.org/loi/ecsp. An international panel of subject expert librarians www.sla.org has ranked Ecology among the 100 most influential journals of the past 100 years in biological and clinical sciences. (http://units.sla.org/division/dbio/publications/resources/dbio100.html). As well, the clickstream statistics place Ecology in centrality of scholarly activity among journals in natural sciences, social sciences and humanities, as demonstrated by the Bollen et al. article. 2009, PLoS ONE 4(3): e4803. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. We also rank very highly in terms of the traditional bibliometrics of citations, see the Journal Citations Report of ISI. In Eigenfactor.org one can see that the Article Influence of Ecology is very high. Ecology, Ecological Applications, and Ecological Monographs give very high value for the money of the more than 400 journals listed by eigenfactor.org in the area of ecology and evolution (eigenfactor.org, search cost-effectiveness). The field of ecology is a huge success. It is now producing many more studies than even a decade ago. There are many new journals, especially in specialized areas. ESA applauds the new journals published by other organizations that feature excellent ecological science. This increasing demand shows in ESA journals: Ecology, Ecological Applications, Ecological Monographs, and Frontiers in Ecology. All have increasing submission rates, substantial bibliometrics, and continue to be sought after by authors and ecological scientists. Ecology articles have a very long half-life of citation. This is because the articles cited are excellent in the eyes of the authors citing them. This applies to articles with long half-life published in other journals. When an author is rejected by a journal, the smart course is to reconsider and recast the work based upon the reviews. Then submit to another journal. If you are rejected after review by an ESA journal, you will have been done a tremendous service in terms of the great reviews provided to
[ECOLOG-L] Ideas in Ecology and Evolution - Vol. 4
Volume 4 (2011) of Ideas in Ecology and Evolution is now complete (http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE), including year-end editorials from four of our Advisory Editors. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution publishes short forum-style articles that develop new ideas or that involve original commentaries on any topics within the broad domains of fundamental or applied ecology or evolution. They may encompass any level of biological organization, and involve any taxa, including humans. Articles may concern subject matter within any recognized sub-discipline of ecology or evolution, or they may be broader in scope, including articles that aim to inform fields of study outside of biology. All articles are joined by a conceptual foundation in the core principles of ecology and evolution studied by biologists. -- Lonnie W. Aarssen -- Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE -- Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617
[ECOLOG-L] Ideas from grad students and post-docs
DO YOU HAVE A NOVEL IDEA OR OPINION? Some of the most fertile ground for the release of creativity in science can be found in the relatively young open minds of graduate students and post-docs, who are not yet biased by theory tenacity. If you are a grad student or post-doc in ecology or evolution, and have a novel opinion or new idea associated with your research, or resulting from your reading of the literature, don't be intimidated by a self-perception of junior status, and don't just blog it or sit on it while it gets scooped by someone else. Consider taking the time to develop your hypothesis or views as an opinion piece / commentary, get feedback from colleagues and supervisors, and submit your manuscript to http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEEIdeas in Ecology and Evolution . IEE is an open-access electronic journal, where your original thinking can be quickly subjected to critical assessment, revision, debate, and further development, and quickly rewarded with peer-reviewed publication credit, where it can therefore have potential to make a significant contribution to the maturation of theory and the progress of science within your discipline. -- Lonnie W. Aarssen -- Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE -- Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617
[ECOLOG-L] Ideas in Ecology and Evolution - Vol. 3
Volume 3 (2010) of Ideas in Ecology and Evolution is now complete (http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE), including a year-end editorial announcing a new peer-review model that will be explored for 2011. In the Author-Directed Peer-Review (ADPR) model, authors make their own arrangements for peer-review of manuscripts, with follow-up revision as necessary - prior to submission - thus providing several advantages over the conventional peer-review system - including faster publication time and reduced author fees (see the editorial for further details). IEE, however, will continue to seek referees and arrange peer-review for submitted manuscripts in the traditional manner, if authors wish. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution publishes short forum-style articles that develop new ideas or that involve original commentaries on any topics within the broad domains of fundamental or applied ecology or evolution. They may encompass any level of biological organization, and involve any taxa, including humans. Articles may concern subject matter within any recognized sub-discipline of ecology or evolution, or they may be broader in scope, including articles that aim to inform fields of study outside of biology. All articles are joined by a conceptual foundation in the core principles of ecology and evolution studied by biologists. -- Lonnie W. Aarssen -- Professor Department of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE -- Campus office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex Email: aarss...@queensu.ca Web:http://post.queensu.ca/~aarssenl/ Tel:613-533-6133 Fax:613-533-6617
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Are reviews anonymous?
Dear All, Complete transparency, with reviewer names disclosed, is the policy for the new open access peer-review journal - Ideas in Ecology and Evolution: http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE In fact, reviewer names are listed within published papers, and reviewers are encouraged to publish their reviews as commentaries, which are in turn also peer-reviewed. Please consider submitting your next commentary or idea paper to IEE! Lonnie Marc Kochzius wrote at 04:44 AM 02/03/2010: Dear All, I agree completely with Kevin that reviewers should sign their review. That's what I started to do and I will not make any reviews for journals that insist that I stay anonymous. From my point of view the problem is that some colleagues hide in anonymity and provide reviews that are not adequate (e.g. impolite, unsubstantiated criticism). Another problem in this context are the editors. I think it is their responsibility to check if a review is adequate. However, my experience is rather that most editors just pass the review to me and I just wonder what kind of reviews I receive. In many cases there is absolutely no quality control regarding the reviews. From many journals I also never get a feedback about my review, nor do I receive the reports of the other reviewers. This makes it impossible for me to evaluate if my review was in concordance with the other reviewers. Regarding the anonymity of the author, I think both sides (author and reviewer) should be named, the system should be as transparent as possible. Unfortunately, it is currently not transparent at all. Cheers, Marc Kevin Murray wrote: Off the point here, but I think that the anonymity should be reversed. Authors should be anonymous and reviewers should be named. Start a peer review revolution...sign all of your reviews!!! Regarding YOUR own reviews. It seems that, if they are anonymous, then posting should be ok. If the reviewer is named, however, you should not post. No laws or moral values were consulted in regards to this email. KLM On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jonathan Greenberg greenb...@ucdavis.eduwrote: Interesting -- I'm primarily interested in reviews YOU receive on your own submitted manuscript (which, 99% of the time, you don't know who they are from) -- are you allowed to post these in any public forum? Since the reviews cannot be linked back to an individual (unless that individual steps forward and takes credit for it), and it is a criticism of your own work, it seems like one should feel free to post these if you want. I was interested in compiling the types of reviews people get on manuscripts for teaching purposes, so I'm trying to find out if its legit for people to share these reviews with me if they end up going out into the public (e.g. on a website)? --j On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Jonathan Greenberg jgrn...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting -- I'm primarily interested in reviews YOU receive on your own submitted manuscript (which, 99% of the time, you don't know who they are from) -- are you allowed to post these in any public forum? Since the reviews cannot be linked back to an individual (unless that individual steps forward and takes credit for it), and it is a criticism of your own work, it seems like one should feel free to post these if you want. I was interested in compiling the types of reviews people get on manuscripts for teaching purposes, so I'm trying to find out if its legit for people to share these reviews with me if they end up going out into the public (e.g. on a website)? --j On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Christopher Brown cabr...@tntech.edu wrote: Jonathan, As it so happens, a message close to yours in my email folder was from a review I did for American Naturalist. As part of the message from the editor is the line Please keep all reviews, including your own, confidential. Thus, at least for Am Nat, it appears that the reviews should remain unpublished in any form. CAB Chris Brown Associate Professor Dept. of Biology, Box 5063 Tennessee Tech University Cookeville, TN 38505 email: cabr...@tntech.edu website: iweb.tntech.edu/cabrown -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Greenberg Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 12:48 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Are reviews anonymous? Quick question that came up recently that I was curious about -- I know REVIEWERS are anonymous, but are the reviews you get supposed to be anonymous, or can they be posted in a public forum? --j Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Dept. of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus Office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex email: aarss...@queensu.ca web:http://biology.queensu.ca/%7Eaarssenl/ tel:
[ECOLOG-L] Vol 2 - Ideas in Ecology and Evolution
Dear Ecolog subscribers, Volume 2 (2009) for Ideas in Ecology and Evolution is now complete (http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE/issue/current) including a year-end editorial with reflection on our first full year of operation, the ongoing mission of the journal, and our anticipation for future growth. IEE is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published at Queen's University, welcoming submissions of forum-style papers involving new ideas and commentaries from all areas of study in ecology and evolution. Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Dept. of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE
[ECOLOG-L] Ideas in Ecology and Evolution
ANNOUNCING A NEW PROMOTIONAL OFFER FROM IEE: Manuscripts can now be submitted and reviewed with no submission fee required from authors. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution is a new peer-reviewed, open-access journal published at Queen's University, welcoming submissions of forum-style papers involving new ideas and commentaries from all areas of study in ecology and evolution. Visit the website at: http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Dept. of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Open Access and Intellectual Imperialism Approval required Re: [ECOLOG-L] Teaching Biostatistics !!!
A new open-access journal published at Queen's University addresses many of the concerns raised here by Wayne and others: IDEAS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE The opening editorial (http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE/article/view/1949/2054) outlines the novel scope, novel peer-review model, and novel financial policy of IEE. IEE was developed to help address three main problems in scientific publication: (1) THERE IS NOW A RAMPANT AND CRIPPLING CULTURE OF ELITISM CENTERED ON JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR: Science is a mission for discovery, not a mission for elitism. Yet many editors and publishers have become more concerned about the mission for elitism and profit - boosting journal reputation through impact factor. To accomplish this, many editors now routinely reject good manuscripts, using the excuse that there are limited page numbers for each volume of the journal, and so there is space to publish only the 'best of the best'. Yet, virtually everyone now reads from digital/electronic production - not paper production. IEE is on-line only, and so there are no page space limitations, plus IEE uses a completely transparent and objective protocol for acceptance/rejection of papers (see the 'pipeline' in the opening editorial). Rejection is never based on elitist goals to publish only the best of the best. (2) IT IS NOW VERY DIFFICULT TO ATTRACT REFEREES AND TO OBTAIN HIGH QUALITY REVIEWS: This is because referees have increasingly busy lives with little incentive to review. Reviews therefore often have arbitrary, debatable, poorly argued, and/or biased recommendations to reject. Many editors use these poor-quality reviews as another gate-keeping strategy to justify rejection based on the elitist goal to boost journal impact factor. Referees can get away with mediocre reviews because they can hide behind anonymity, with no accountability to anyone. The philosophy of IEE is that referees are analogous to expert consultants/witnesses in a court of law, who are often paid for their professional assessment, and are always accountable for their views, and hence never anonymous. Accordingly, referees for IEE are paid professionals, and are named within published papers; there is no anonymity. This provides both incentive and accountability for providing a high-quality review. Authors pay a submission fee for this, but the money is returned to the community of colleagues (as remuneration for reviewing), rather than paid to big publishers (IEE operates purely on a not-for-profit basis). In addition, authors with limited funds can earn remuneration from reviewing, and then use this to pay for the publication fee for their own paper submitted to IEE (or to any other open-access journal). (3) THERE IS AN INTRINSIC BIAS AGAINST THE PUBLICATION OF NEW IDEAS: In most traditional journals, there is limited interest in publishing 'ideas and perspectives' style papers, and high rejection rates often means that it can take more than a year to get a new idea published, by which time it is already old - scooped by someone else. An alternative is to promote ideas through blogging, but most scientists don't blog because they get no credit/recognition for blogging. IEE is the only journal in Ecology and Evolution that is dedicated exclusively to forum-type papers. It is also on-line only and open-access, and has a fair, transparent protocol for manuscript acceptance/rejection. A new idea, therefore, can be published within weeks - analogous to blog-style communication speed - and at the same time, the author earns peer-reviewed publication credit. PLEASE CONSIDER SENDING YOUR NEXT NEW IDEA OR COMMENTARY PAPER TO IEE! Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Dept. of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Editor Ideas in Ecology and Evolution http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/IEE Campus Office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex email: aarss...@queensu.ca web:http://biology.queensu.ca/%7Eaarssenl/ tel:613-533-6133 fax:613-533-6617
Wanting, or not wanting, babies
In terms of wanting, or not wanting babies, if we wish to predict what future generations will be like, then our most reliable guide as biologists comes from the principle (actually, law) of natural selection: the most common future traits for a species will be those of its predecessors (including those individuals alive today) that left the most descendants. This will be especially true for traits that affect offspring production directly. It is quite obvious, therefore, that for humans, these predecessors will not include those alive today who choose to be childless or childfree. The critical question then is, do we have any reason to suspect (or hope) that those individuals alive today whose heritable inclinations promote offspring production, also have heritable inclinations that will promote sustainability and protection for the environment? There is not a single species that has ever lived, including humans, whose evolution has resulted in these consequences. And, sadly, there is little reason to believe that the future evolution of humans will be any different. Lonnie Aarssen
Re: ESAs News and Views Blog
With the announcement of ESAs new News and Views Blog (http://www.esa.org/esablog/?p=13), academic ecologists will soon be asking themselves a number of important questions: How this will impact on the ideas and forum sections that have emerged in many journals in recent years? Will this ESA Blog be a potential source for someone to mine 'new' ideas and work them up for an Oikos Forum submission? Gee, do you think that would be stealing? Probably. If it IS regarded as stealing someone else's ideas, is anyone going to care? Probably. If people ARE going to care, does this mean that the ESA Blog should/will become a 'citable' publication? Probably. If it DOES become a citable publication, how will a blog participant know that his/her blog is being cited? Will the ESA blog then be added eventually to Science Citation and other publication searching services? Probably - this would be easy to do, I presume. Will the published comments on your ideas from other blog participants serve as a peer-review process, thus making your blog a 'refereed' publication? Probably. Many are already arguing that this is a better model for peer review, and open access journals are already experimenting with it - e.g. PLoSone (http://www.plosone.org/). By comparison, the peer review process in established, traditional journals is antiquated, depressingly inefficient, and promotes plodding conservatism that stifles the release of creativity and the very progress of science itself (see the recent opinion piece by Adam Rogers at http://w\ww.wired.com/wired/archive/14.09/start.html?pg=3). Many people are just fed up, and are looking for more modern and efficient publication domains, especially ones that guard against the rampant elitism and old-boys networks that are promoted by reviewer anonymity and where exclusivity is practiced by imposing silly printed page limits in a modern world where no-one even reads from pages anymore but instead from pdf files, largely. Is the ESA Blog the answer? Probably. If we get this far with it, will ESA Blogs be considered a legitimate refereed publication to be included in one's professional CV? Probably, eventually. Data mining is already all the rage. Has a new era arrived? Is the next rage going to be 'idea mining'? Probably. Lonnie W. Aarssen Professor Dept. of Biology Queen's University Kingston, ON Canada, K7L 3N6 Campus Office: Room 4326, Biosciences Complex email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web:http://biology.queensu.ca/%7Eaarssenl/ tel:613-533-6133 fax:613-533-6617
Re: gender issues in ecology
With the on-going discussion here of issues involving challenges of careers with children, childlessness, and the subugation of women, this seems like a good opportunity for me to plug a recent publication of mine that may be of interest to some - available for download at: http://biology.queensu.ca/%7Eaarssenl/lab/pdf/Aarssen%20%20Altman%202006%20Evolutionary%20Psychology.pdf Aarssen, L. W. and S. T. Altman (2006). Explaining below-replacement fertility and increasing childlessness in wealthy countries: Legacy drive and the transmission competition hypothesis. Evolutionary Psychology 4: 290-302. Lonnie Greetings Kristina : I'm a childless (by my own perception of necessity) 40-year old female 7 years out of my PhD - I just recently got a permanent position after a series of post-docs. My take is that a PhD program probably would not discriminate against age - in fact, older more mature graduate students are often very stable and focused. You would probably have more flexibility and freedom to deal with your family while in grad school that when you were in a job. My concern would be that you would experience subtle discrimination when the PhD was finished and you are older and looking for work. On the other hand, if you already have your family established, maybe this would be a benefit as your employer would not have to worry about you suddenly leaving and burdening the work place with your absence. In regards to an earlier email, I have repeatedly seen that men with families not only receive higher pay, but the best and more permanent positions with benefits, and more flexibility regarding where they want to work, taking time off, etc. This is totally illegal, but is the norm. Good luck - Becky Kerns
