The potential of the Biodiversity Data Journal

For the past few months a new and promising journal has been part of the family of journals under the umbrella of Pensoft Publishers. In the meantime other journals have been added to Pensoft portfolio and, beyond of this publisher, there are dozens of new journals being added every year. So what is news here?

Well, the Biodiversity Data Journal (BDJ) is not exactly your regular biodiversity/taxonomic journal. For one, it does not have upper or lower limit on the size of papers to be published there (more on that below). Another novelty is the online review system, the consolidation of all reviews in one single document (online), and other technical tricks that allow for a faster process of publication. When I write fast I mean much FASTER than a regular journal. There are other interesting features and capabilities (some already functional, others to be added in the near future) that make this journal very attractive. The reader is strongly recommended to check the Editorial that introduced the journal four months ago.
 

Personally, there are three things that specially attract me. First, the fact that there is no lower limit on the data to be published allows for new distribution records, new biological information, and similar data (stored in many natural history collections) to be published now in a much expedite way. Usually taxonomist would wait for a big monograph or review to add that kind of information. But, as it is well known, such big papers may take years (if not decades) to be prepared. And, in the meantime, the data is seating in the collections, unused, loosing value, and even risking to be lost (if, heaven forbids, the taxonomist dies before finishing his/her review). The BDJ can now help to solve at least part of this bottleneck.

The second thing that I like is the possibility of post-publication review of the papers (although I still have not seen any paper being reviewed that way, but hopefully it will happen soon). This will allow for the community to weight into the published papers, which will certainly help to improve the accuracy and quality of what has been published. We are still in the infancy of this kind of approach, but I can see the merits of this, and I am a strong supporter of the idea.

Oriental wonders

A month ago I was visiting Kees Achterberg in Leiden, The Netherlands. I spent there two weeks learning from him and his extraordinary collection of braconid wasps, part of the great museum and institution that is Naturalis Biodiversity Center.

There are many stories I could tell about Kees. He is not only a famous scientist, but also a very kind human being -a person anyone would enjoy to have as company. My visit happened one month before his retirement, after 37 years of work. And his office was a bit... eclectic. But, in spite of the thousand things he had to finish and deal with, Kees was a great host, finding time to answer my countless questions and make me feel welcome at all times.

Kees at his office, one month before retiring...

Perhaps in the future I could write more about this visit, but for now will restrict myself to the braconid collection in Naturalis. The museum takes pride on its large holdings -one of the top five natural history institutions worlwide in terms of collection size. This is certainly the case for Braconidae, with many specimens being collected and/or acquired by Kees and his colleagues over the years. 

I focused on the Microgastrinae section only, but even there could only scratch the surface. After two weeks of work I was able to sort to genera and briefly organize part (some 8,000 specimens) of the collection that covers the Oriental fauna. But I could not finish, and there are several thousands of microgastrines still waiting to be sorted and integrated into the main (=identified) collection. The Microgastrinae holdings are very rich on European fauna, as one would expect. But there are representatives from all major regions of the planet.