Gallery Links
Users Online
· Guests Online: 17

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 4,950
· Newest Member: JeffersonA
Forum Threads
Theme Switcher
Switch to:
Last Seen Users
· Volker00:08:46
· weia00:47:13
· Tony Irwin00:58:33
· JCobain01:05:38
· RamiP01:09:36
· Reimund Ley01:10:33
· ESant01:51:38
· smol01:53:43
· Haleun01:56:39
· Carnifex02:09:21
Latest Photo Additions
View Thread
Diptera.info :: Miscellaneous :: General queries
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
Publication dates
zcuc
#1 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2011 10:05
Member

Location: Israel
Posts: 492
Joined: 08.10.07

Hi,

Occasionally, I find that different publications reference the same bibliographic source with different dates. For example Acta Societatis scientiarum fennicae, 19 published in 1893. Can be seen online here: http://www.biodiv...item/52290
Some catalogs reference chapter 19(3) to 1891 or chapter 19(15) to 1892 and other reference all chapters to 1893.
When I'm looking at the first cover page I see it was publish at MSCCCXCIII and no other data is available.
How can I know what is the true publish time for each chapter? Could they published separately or earlier dates than 1893 is just an error?
 
Cesa
#2 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2011 10:28
User Avatar

Member

Location: Turkey
Posts: 1276
Joined: 13.10.09

Hello Israel,
This is a problem. In older literature, we see a publication, published in parts (or chapters) with their special dates of publication. And it is distributed to the readers so.
You must care the dates of publication of each parts published in different dates. At the end of this process, the main publication appear, for example with 10-20 chapters. You may see on the first cover page of the main book only one date of publication. This is normally the last date of that publication process. In fact its parts published earlier with different but earlier dates of publication. This case is important, if some nomenclatural act exists in such works. I hope my complex explanation understandable.
Edited by Cesa on 02-08-2011 11:34
 
http://www.cesa-tr.org/
zcuc
#3 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2011 12:04
Member

Location: Israel
Posts: 492
Joined: 08.10.07

Thanks Cesa,

I had guess that an old book's "Tomus" can be publish separately in a different date but I can't find any evidence to that date in the text ( at least not in the above online book ) So could it be that this information found elsewhere?
 
Cesa
#4 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2011 12:32
User Avatar

Member

Location: Turkey
Posts: 1276
Joined: 13.10.09

Dear Zcuc,
Tomus of the old books, or volumes may carry different dates of publication. But a single volume may compose of several fascicules; they may also different dates of publication. Sometimes dates of publication were not mentioned there. Under such circumstance, authors search the exact date of publications in various ways. Results of such researches are published separately in some bibliographical journals.
Have you an example that you have hesitation on the date of publication?
Edited by Cesa on 02-08-2011 12:33
 
http://www.cesa-tr.org/
Cesa
#5 Print Post
Posted on 02-08-2011 12:41
User Avatar

Member

Location: Turkey
Posts: 1276
Joined: 13.10.09

Dear Zcuc,
The most recognized journal on this subject is:
formerly: Journal of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History, since 1936.
actually: Archives of Natural History, with the following homepage in the present time.
http://www.euppublishing.com/journal/anh
 
http://www.cesa-tr.org/
zcuc
#6 Print Post
Posted on 03-08-2011 09:56
Member

Location: Israel
Posts: 492
Joined: 08.10.07

Cesa wrote:
Have you an example that you have hesitation on the date of publication?


Dear Cesa,
I'm in particular wondering about the examples I gave in my first post chapters
19(3) and 19(15). Thanks for the info about Archives of Natural History. Although I wasn't able to find the answers by searching their site I'll try to continue my investigation.

Cheers.
 
Cesa
#7 Print Post
Posted on 03-08-2011 12:21
User Avatar

Member

Location: Turkey
Posts: 1276
Joined: 13.10.09

Dear Zcuc,
I didnot see any evidence about the date of publication, except 1893. If no publication exists on the correct date of this journal, then the date on the front page is considered as correct date, namely "1893".
In some internet sites, dates of publication of some species appear as 1891 or 1892, as you already told. Such errors appear usually due to the usage of incorrect information without checking up properly. Personally, I follow the date information that placed on the front page, i.e. 1893.
 
http://www.cesa-tr.org/
zcuc
#8 Print Post
Posted on 04-08-2011 16:25
Member

Location: Israel
Posts: 492
Joined: 08.10.07

Thanks Cesa Smile
 
zcuc
#9 Print Post
Posted on 05-08-2011 08:03
Member

Location: Israel
Posts: 492
Joined: 08.10.07

Update:
I'd been informed that issue 19(3) dated to 1883 was cited in a 1982 volume http://biodiversi...ge/5745854 so it is now more reasonable that the issues in volume 19 indeed published separately over several year.
 
Cesa
#10 Print Post
Posted on 05-08-2011 09:51
User Avatar

Member

Location: Turkey
Posts: 1276
Joined: 13.10.09

In Annln naturh. Mus. Wien vol.8, p.80 (1893) [attached], it is stated that Reuter's Monography on Reduvius, published in Acta soc. sci. fenn vol.19 (nr.10), was distributed as reprint between 1 July and 31 Dec. 1892.
In this case reference to Reuter's Monography must be dated as "[1892]". "[]" is important here, which indicates different information from the original one.
Cesa attached the following image:


[13.89Kb]
Edited by Cesa on 05-08-2011 10:18
 
http://www.cesa-tr.org/
zcuc
#11 Print Post
Posted on 07-08-2011 09:08
Member

Location: Israel
Posts: 492
Joined: 08.10.07

Hi Cesa,
How can you see the reprint was published between 1 July to 31 Dec? The only date I see here is Sep. ?
 
Cesa
#12 Print Post
Posted on 08-08-2011 04:39
User Avatar

Member

Location: Turkey
Posts: 1276
Joined: 13.10.09

In my post (05-08-2011 10:51), I attached Reuter's Monograph entered to the Library of the Wien Museum betw. 1 July and 31 Dec. Here is (attached) the title of the list of the publications entered on those days (see Annln naturh. Mus. Wien, vol.8 page 77 (Notizen). However, your date is more precise; then acceptable.
Cesa attached the following image:


[58.48Kb]
 
http://www.cesa-tr.org/
Jump to Forum:
Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Otites publication What should I use? 2 23-05-2023 12:31
Inquiry for the publication of A.E. Stubbs General queries 1 12-04-2011 17:16
Chrysotoxum spp, various dates, Hungary Syrphidae 19 07-02-2010 15:09
Chrysogaster sp(p), various locations, various dates Syrphidae 5 06-02-2010 11:29
Phania funesta, various dates, Hungary Diptera (adults) 6 17-01-2010 10:52
Date and time
28 March 2024 16:16
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Temporary email?
Due to fact this site has functionality making use of your email address, any registration using a temporary email address will be rejected.

Paul
Donate
Please, help to make
Diptera.info
possible and enable
further improvements!
Latest Articles
Syrph the Net
Those who want to have access to the Syrph the Net database need to sign the
License Agreement -
Click to Download


Public files of Syrph the Net can be downloaded HERE

Last updated: 25.08.2011
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

07.03.24 00:01
Some flies preserved in ethanol and then pinned often get the eyes sunken, how can this be avoided? Best answer: I usually keep alcohol-collected material in alcohol

17.08.23 15:23
Aneomochtherus

17.08.23 13:54
Tony, I HAD a blank in the file name. Sorry!

17.08.23 13:44
Tony, thanks! I tried it (see "Cylindromyia" Wink but don't see the image in the post.

17.08.23 11:37
pjt - just send the post and attached image. Do not preview thread, as this will lose the link to the image,

16.08.23 08:37
Tried to attach an image to a forum post. jpg, 32kB, 72dpi, no blanks, ... File name is correctly displayed, but when I click "Preview Thread" it just vanishes. Help!

23.02.23 21:29
Has anyone used the Leica DM500, any comments.

27.12.22 21:10
Thanks, Jan Willem! Much appreciated. Grin

19.12.22 11:33
Thanks Paul for your work on keeping this forum available! Just made a donation via PayPal.

09.10.22 17:07
Yes, dipterologists from far abroad, please buy your copy at veldshop. Stamps will be expensive, but he, the book is unreasonably cheap Smile

Render time: 1.97 seconds | 189,855,781 unique visits