Taxonomic databases should reflect, and not substitute, published scientific literature and community consensus: some observations on WoRMS and barnacles
Language English Country Australia Media print-electronic
Document type Letter
- MeSH
- Databases, Factual standards MeSH
- Classification methods MeSH
- Thoracica classification MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Letter MeSH
Aquatic Zoology Western Australian Museum Welshpool Western Australia Australia
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Ambiente e della Terra Università di Milano Bicocca Milan Italy
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra Università di Pisa Pisa Italy
Earth and Oceanic Systems Group RMIT University Melbourne Victoria Australia
Ivančická 581 Prague Czech Republic
Jarreau Scientific Baton Rouge Louisiana USA
Koninklijk Zeeuwsch Genootschap der Wetenschappen Middelburg The Netherlands
MBRD Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla California USA
Museo di Storia Naturale Università di Pisa Calci Italy
Museums Victoria Melbourne Victoria Australia
Palaeontological Department Natural History Museum National Museum Prague Czech Republic
See more in PubMed
Appeltans W, Decock W, Vanhoorne B et al. (2011). The World Register of Marine Species: An authoritative, open-access web-resource for all marine species. In: Proceedings of the Future of the 21st Century Ocean: Marine Sciences and European Research Infrastructures, an International Symposium, Brest, France, 28 June-1 July 2011.
Costello MJ, Bouchet P, Boxshall G et al. (2013). Global coordination and standardisation in marine biodiversity through the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) and related databases. PLoS ONE 8, e51629.
Horton T, Gofas S, Kroh A et al. (2017). Improving nomenclatural consistency: a decade of experience in the World Register of Marine Species. European Journal of Taxonomy 389, 1−24.
Ross-Hellauer T (2017). What is open peer review? A systematic review. F1000Research 2017, 588.
