Citations?

[Narelle]

Is there any way to include some citations for CLOG pages where external sources are referenced? More than just the original description?
I know not everything here can be sourced if the information comes from anecdotal reports from within the hobby, but I think it would be valuable to have a way for those interested to be able to read more from the source material.

For example, I've noticed some discrepancies in names between here and fishbase and would like to read the papers where these name changes occur, but I haven't been able to find the ones I've searched for so far. (i.e. Tachysurus vs Pseudobagrus, Erethistes vs Hara, Duringlanis vs Centromochlus, etc.) PC seems to be using the more recent names from what I can tell, so other sites like fishbase that have readily listed citations don't include this information.

If this is already a feature that I've overlooked though, I'd love to know where to find it!

[Jools]

The latest taxonomic info comes from catalog of fishes, we don't use fishbase. I might be able to add a link to that source per species IF that's what you were looking for?

Cheers,

Jools

[bekateen]

The latest taxonomic info comes from catalog of fishes, we don't use fishbase. I might be able to add a link to that source per species IF that's what you were looking for?
Cheers,
Jools

Narelle, I think you are asking for a bibliography field to be added to CLOG pages, so that additional citations can be listed in the CLOGs for cases when (e.g.) a species is reclassified, etc. Yes?

Coincidentally, there have been a few times when I edited a CLOG page and I listed a second citation on the page, but I believe in some of those cases, if not all, the autobots which trawl the CLOGs looking for errors have subsequently removed those excess entries of mine. Clearly, adding the secondary entries was not helpful since the field is only for the original species description reference and not for updates or redescriptions.

I believe Jools' solution of a link to COF would be sufficient, since each entry there does provide links to all taxonomic updates per species name (all the blue numbers visible in the attached image are links to references).

A COF link to the "species" search for a particular name would be a welcome addition to the CLOG pages. I use COF to trace down articles frequently.

Cheers, Eric

[Jools]

We could add all that information here but there are reasons for and against. The for is it saves COF money and would allow formatting to be improved. The against would be that it might upset the folks at COF, something I've not tested. Sometimes the Academic community are delighted if you properly use their data and sometimes not.

I will have a look at the link if you wish? I'm sure that'd be OK with them for starters.

Jools

[bekateen]

I would add another against for adding all the info to the CLOG: i didn't interpret Narelle's request to be that the info is copied from COF, but rather that we update citations as they come out (e.g., transferring citations from the forum when relevant to taxonomy). We wouldn't be taking COF data but we'd be replicating it independently with new changes. That itself is not the negative. The negative is that it would require curating over time.

Just another consideration. Which is fine, but why if we can just link to COF for the same info?

Cheers, Eric

[Jools]

Yup, built a prototype as had a little time - you can change the taxon in the URL:

https://www.planetcatfish.com/common/co ... cies=zebra

What thinkest all?

Jools

[bekateen]

They all work. I like the first choice, in that, if you're looking on the CLOG for that species, then you get all the history of valid names and all links associated.

The others may be too specific or general, as they certainly don't return everything on any one species, but they also are limited more and less to particular sets of references.

If any of the others were useful, it may be the fourth choice: the list of references for the genus, IF you wanted to place that on the CLOG page for the Genus, rather than on the CLOG pages for the individual species. That said, the fourth choice leaves out citations for species that weren't originally Hypancistrus but have been moved into the genus (specifically, Micracanthicus). So take the results as partial. That all said, I'm not sure such a link adds anything that can't be gotten directly from species pages, which I think is the bigger priority since often species get changed and not whole genera (although obviously the latter happens too).

Just my thoughts. @Narelle, what best approximates your original query?

Cheers, Eric

[Narelle]

Hi,

I'm so sorry I never came back to this thread! I completely forgot about it - I posted it in the middle of organizing a cross country move, then got here and started a PhD, so I've been a bit distracted.

I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I wasn't familiar with COF previously. That was exactly what I was trying to find.

The first option in the prototype does accomplish what I was looking for. Now that I know to look there, I can just go to COF directly, but if it's not too much work to add, I could see others in the same boat as I was at the time I originally posted this thread benefiting if the link was added to the CLOG in a similar way that we have AquaticRepublic, FishBase, GBIF, and Encyclopedia of Life links listed now.

Thank you both for putting so much thought and effort to this and I'm sorry again that I never came back and followed up!

[Jools]

No worries, I will look at adding it in.

Cheers,

Jools