Sunday, August 19, 2012


Some people have asked me questions regarding the Recent Literature on Lichens (RLL), and I thought it would be helpful to post some answers here.

Q: What is 'recent'?

A: If a work was published more than 5 years ago, it will not be included in a 'recent literature' list.

Q: What should be done with literature that is more than 5 years old and never made it to a published list?

A: Since there is a database associated with RLL that is routinely used by lichenologist to find literature, it is important to make sure certain older works do not fall by the wayside. If a particular work is never cited in a list as part of the RLL series, it can still be added to the database as part of the 'RLL supplement.' Anyone is allowed to add anything to the supplement at any time through this web-form. Please direct any questions regarding the supplement to Einar Timdal.

Q: How should literature/citations be sent for inclusion in the published RLL lists?

A: Although I am happy to receive reprints of articles, the best way to send along citations for inclusion is by using a modified RIS format, as follows:

T1 - Lichens are cool 
JF - Journal of Awesome Stuff 
VL - 223 
IS - 3 
SP - 123 
EP - 124 
PY - 2012 
AU - Rindalo, F. D. 
AU - L. V. Marisco 
AU - C. Denado 
AB - This article is about why lichens are the coolest. A new species of <i>Parmotrema</i> is described. 
KW - Lichens 
KW - Hipness 
UR - 
PN - In Old Norse; new species: <i>Parmotrema redentenii</i> F. D. Rindalo 
ER -

This can simply be typed or pasted into a text file and sent to me. Feel free to look up more information here on RIS format. The modifications used for RLL are (1) the use of html tags for designating italics, (2) a "PN" field for published notes [new taxa and language of article (when not English) are always reported], and (3) the placement of first initials after the last name for the first author, but before the last name for all subsequent authors. So the rule of thumb for literature not yet in the database should be: send it to me if it's less than 5 years old (preferably in RIS format), but if it's older than that, add it to the supplement.

Q: Why do the newer RLL lists have fewer pages than the older ones?

A: There was an editorial request from the staff of The Bryologist to cut down on the length of RLL lists to conserve space. Therefore, summaries of articles are not provided in the most recent lists (only the language of the article and new taxa are given as notes). However, full abstracts are given in the database for the articles that have abstracts freely available electronically.

- Brendan

No comments:

Post a Comment