Corporate AnimalBase comment to the ICZN Code Amendment

German version/Deutsche Version   Spanish version/Versión española

Currently there are attempts to change the Code and to allow
electronic publications for nomenclature. Until recently the Code has
only allowed printed paper as published work.

The AnimalBase Team has been asked by the Secretary of the ICZN
(International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature) to inform
taxonomists about this process, and has also asked for comments on the
proposed Amendment.

Contents of this page:

1 - Introduction (short text)
2 - Procedure and background (long text)
3 - Main statements of the corporate AnimalBase comment (short text)
4 - Full text of the corporate AnimalBase comment (long text)
5 - List of supporters of the AnimalBase comment (long list)

Please send this page also to other interested persons and mailing
groups.

Introduction

The AnimalBase Team in Goettingen has a critical position to the
Commission's proposal, and we have prepared a corporate comment
which we have submitted to the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature
(September issue, 2009).

If you like to support our corporate AnimalBase comment, please send a
short e-mail to
fwelter (at) gwdg.de
containing your name, city (and institute if you have) and country, the
animal group in which you are specialised.

It is no problem if you are not affiliated to an institution, the
ICZN has also explicitely asked for opinions by amateur taxonomists
who are doing very important taxonomic work. It is the spirit of
AnimalBase to support amateur scientists by providing free access to
literature, so we would very much appreciate their feedback.

Procedure and background

The proposal for the Amendment was published in August 2008, followed
by a 1-year period for the zoological community to comment the
proposal. At the end a 2/3 majority vote by the Commissioners is
needed to finally adopt the Amendment and to integrate its contents to
the Code.
The Amendment has two topics: accepting electronical publications for
nomenclature, and defining a newly established database (ZooBank) to
work as an Official Register.

The full text of the Amendment proposal can be downloaded here:
http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2008/f/zt01908p067.pdf
There is only an English version.

In the last BZN issue some contributions to the discussion were
published:
http://www.iczn.org/BZN%2066(1)%20Contributions%20to%20the%20discussion%20on%20electronic%20publication.pdf

ICZN seems to have serious problems in reaching taxonomists outside a
narrow circle of zoologists surrounding the Commission. Contacts
to and feedback from taxonomists in non-English speaking countries
seem to be particularly difficult. Many Commissioners seem to support
the Amendment, but ICZN has expressedly written us that also critical
comments are appreciated.

The AnimalBase Team in Goettingen rejects most parts of the proposed
Amendment. Here we explain why.

AnimalBase is deep inside the field of electronic literature. We are
part of the consortium of the project Biodiversity Heritage Library
for Europe (BHL-Europe), where leading IT technologists in the field
of digital archiving are currently trying to develop strategies for
sustainable preservation of electronic publications.

After having worked a long time in this field we came to the
conclusion that sustainably preserving electronic information is a
serious problem. In contrast to printed books, the future of
electronic literature files is unpredictable. After 50 years of
computer technology, archiving of digital files is not yet solved.

This is why we reject the proposal to accept electronic publications
for nomenclature. Our position is in accordance with the situation in
botany, where attempts to allow electronic publications have already
been rejected, for the very same reason. Zoology has basically the
same background. We all know very well that zoological nomenclature
cannot work without availability of original publications. Access to
original 200 year-old publications is indispensable for our work.

In AnimalBase we work hard to provide free access to electronic files
of literature. We love the world of electronic information and we
work with PDF files ourselves almost exclusively and every day. But
we are always aware that all these electronic files we produce and we
consume are only copies from paper-based originals which have been
kept in our libraries for 200, 300 or more years. Our earliest scans
are from the 1550s! Although we work with the most modern technology,
we are always aware that our electronic files will most probably not
last as long as the printed books. The paper publication will always
remain the backup that counts. Paper is the only reliable storage
format. We know very well that the future of our electronic files is
unpredictable, we can only hope our work will be useful for some
generations.

The Amendment is primarily proposed to allow publishing nomenclatural
acts in e-only journals, open access journals which do not produce any
paper outprints any more. These journals create PDF files in a variety
of different versions and standards. This is much worse for
sustainable archiving than what we are doing here in AnimalBase and
BHL, where PDF is never used as a storage format. In our Centre of
Digitisation (GDZ) only TIFF files are created and saved. If you
download a PDF file from our server to print out a publication, this
is always only a derivate from the original TIFF file, which is saved
in the repository. PDF is a very bad format for storage. The fact that
thousands of scientists use this format today does not provide
security that the files will be readable in 100 years (TIFF, ASCII or
XML would have a much better perspective). Our statements in the
corporate AnimalBase comment (see below) about the PDF format are
cited from IT specialists working in the task groups for sustainable
archiving in the BHL-Europe project.

If e-only journals would use TIFF or JPEG2000 and provide strategies
for long-term storage the situation would be slightly less dramatic.
But it is PDF, and the ICZN has no power to change the situation and
to force e-only journals to provide other formats and strategies for
sustainable storage.
The whole idea behind the proposed Amendment must be rejected, it is
dangerous for the future of nomenclature.

We know that it is very hard to believe that all information we
currently consume electronically without thinking much about it, shall
be lost some day. But indeed IT specialists in the BHL-Europe
consortium consider this as a serious and realistic risk. The European
Union and other funders spend millions of Euros in strategies for
sustainable archiving of electronic literature files.
Hervé Colinmaire (head of the IT department of the National Library
of France) said: "The only way to reliably preserve electronic
publications is to print them out on durable paper and deposit the
outprints."
Printed paper is not only the best storage format we have, it is also
the only reliable one.

The second point in the proposed Amendment concerns the new database
ZooBank which shall be called Official Register. The goal is to make
ZooBank the official database of the Code where all taxonomists must
register their nomenclatural acts within one year after having
published them.

From our work in AnimalBase we know that creating such a database is
not trivial. At the beginning there are many many bugs in such a
database, and you need long test periods to see what is possible and
what does not work properly. Login procedures are problematic,
hackers and spam can be a problem, it is also necessary to collect
experience with external users who may not know English and need to
submit data from the most diverse computers of the world. One problem
of ZooBank is that it has no sustainable funding, and we all know
that economy does not really depend on zoological taxonomy.
AnimalBase has the same problem, much of what is done here is
voluntary work. We know very well about the difficulties a database
will be confronted with when you cannot pay a programmer. Or if you
need to replace an experienced programmer by a new person. ZooBank
will need continuously paid IT technologists working for it, without
interruption and into an eternal future. If this cannot be provided,
the Code should not make it official.

We appreciate the establishment of ZooBank and we are looking forward
to see it working. But we reject the idea of making it an official
database in the Code immediately, without any test phase and without
a serious concept of its financial future.

Main statements of the corporate AnimalBase comment

1. Electronic publications are not sustainable (technically yes, but not practically) and should as in botany not be accepted for nomenclature.

2. CD-ROMs and DVDs (which remain readable only a few years, as we know today) should generally not be accepted as published work, including those published after 1999.

3. For paper-based publications a minimum number of 100 printed copied should be required (two laser outprints are currently sufficient, this is unacceptable).

4. ZooBank shall not be included to the Code as Official Register, we would need at leat one decade of practical experience with this database, and a seriously elaborated concept for a sustainable financial future.

Full text of the corporate AnimalBase comment

1. Electronic publications are not sustainable (technically yes,
but not practically) and should not be accepted for nomenclatural
acts, no matter which file format or version.

We have come to the conclusion that it is currently not possible to
reliably maintain electronic data sustainable. Zoological nomenclature
cannot work without the availability of printed original publications.
From our experience we know that consulting 200-300 year old original
literature is indispensable for taxonomic work. We cannot rely on
secondary sources (see also 3). Some of us work almost exclusively
with electronic files. But in every case the file is a copy of a
printed book.

AnimalBase is part of the consortium of the BHL-Europe project
(Biodiversity Heritage Library for Europe), where IT technologists are
currently trying to develop strategies for sustainable archival
systems for electronic literature data, with the most modern methods
and funded with millions of Euros by the European Union.

Sustainable archiving consists of 3 components: ingest, storage and
digest. Printed books are able to cover all 3 components. Since the
mid-1450s this has accounted for successful long-term archiving and
has minimized information loss. In digital environments these
components must be strictly separated. If this is not understood,
massive losses of information can be the result, as for example in
NASA's moon mission files which are still present but nobody can read
them any more, so that the information was almost entirely lost. The
same applied to 20 % of the data saved in the Voyager spacecraft
missions from the end-1970s. The problem is not necessarily of storage
media, financial power and lack of IT specialists. Lack of an
appropriate strategy, unawareness of the need to use a well selected
storage format, unawareness of the need of metadata standards (the
moon mission files were saved without metadata), and, very important
in our case, sociopolitical issues are the major threats to
sustainable archiving.

In the proposed Amendment (Art. 8.1.3.1) "widely accessible
electronic copies with fixed content and format"  is mentioned as the
only technical criterion to be satisfied, PDF is mentioned as an
example. Nothing is mentioned about metadata requirements. Nothing is
mentioned on strategies for storage format issues. PDF is a pure
digest format that can currently be decoded because reader software is
commercially available. All IT technologists working in the BHL-Europe
project agree that PDF is no appropriate format for storage. No one
can guarantee us that in 20 years PDF will be the commonly used
format, and that in 100 years a librarian will know at all what a PDF
format was. In other words, relying on e-only publications in PDF
format alone - without providing a strategy to solve the storage
problem - bears the threat (or perspective) of irreversible and
massive data losses in the future.

LOCKSS and Portico, mentioned by the Commission as examples for
permanent archives for electronic journals, have no strategies
involving thoughts on sustainable storage formats and we do not
consider them as promising approaches to solve the problem. This is in
accordance with the position of the BHL-Europe consortium.

The storage component in an electronic archival environment is not
trivial. The strategies currently developed in the BHL-Europe project
involve building a gigantic computer terminal in England as a
repository, in collaboration with leading IT companies such as
Microsoft and others, and also the presence of administrative bodies
encharged to replace the storage formats in due time without
information loss by new formats when these will be in the process of
replacing the old storage formats. We are currently in a situation in
which the first steps for sustainable archiving are being developed.
Long-term preservation of electronic information requires continuously
high financial inputs, and it is still unclear who will pay the costs
in the future. The problem is much less of a technical than of a
sociopolitical nature. We are at the very beginning of a new age, and
in a stage where we cannot precict that it actually will work and
successfully preserve electronic biodiversity literature. The problem
that due to the high costs we will have only very few central
repositories (only UK is funded, US and China are planned) remains
unsolved.

2. CD-ROMs and DVDs should not be regarded as published work, no
matter when they were issued. This should also apply to CD-ROMs and
DVDs issued after 1999 under Art. 8.6 of the 4th edition. All authors
who published on CD-ROMs and DVDs should be forced to publish their
nomenclatural acts on printed paper, the dates would be taken from
their first publication on printed paper.

First, CD-ROMs and DVDs cannot be read any more after 100 years. There
can be no doubt that the files will have become corrupted and there
will be no machines any more to read them. Second, no name established
since 1999 can have become long-accepted to provide a threat to the
stability of nomenclature. And third, authors who violated a Code's
expressed Recommendation (8B) cannot expect that their actions will be
protected for the eternal future.

3. To be published, a work should obligatorily have been printed in a
minimum of 100 paper copies. Publications issued after 1985 in less
than 40 copies should not be regarded as published work. Works of
which no original is available any more should not be recognized as
published work.

This would reflect current practice in zoology, where doctoral and
diploma theses issued in a few outprints are usually not accepted for
nomenclature. Doctoral theses in countries were 50 paper issues were
required to be given to a public library are probably recognized by
most taxonomists as published work. The Code does currently not
reflect taxonomists' behaviour in this concern. Since home printers
became available it became technically possible to print out 2 sheets
and declare this as Code-compliant published work. A minimum number of
required copies is urgently needed in response to the technical
progress. In AnimalBase we are currently not aware of a single case
where a printed work is certainly not available any more. We know some
cases cited in secondary sources where we suspect that the originals
were manuscripts, but others argued that these had been publications.

4. Journals publishing primarily electronically should contain a
statement printed at least once in each issue that printed copies on
durable paper of every issue are deposited in a minimum of 30 major
libraries which are identified by name in the volume itself. The
issues should also actually be deposited in these libraries.

The need to meet this obligatory requirement would be helpful for
taxonomists to select journals for submitting papers with
nomenclatural acts. Zoologists working in certain fields can subdivide
their publications, to publish bioscientific contents in e-only
journals and nomenclatural acts in paper-based journals. In botany
this is the same situation. We see advantages in a slightly reduced
number of journals in which nomenclatural acts can be published.
Nomenclatural acts should preferrably not be published in
non-taxonomic journals, the reviewers of which are not necessarily
skilled to evaluate correctness in nomenclatural matters.

5. The Commission should not have the power to declare unpublished
work (including electronic publications) as published work, neither
should it have the right to issue Declarations on the matter of what
constitutes published work.

6. The Official Register should not be mentioned in the Code.

We personally appreciate very much the efforts to establish ZooBank.
But it should only be included as official to the Code after one or
several decades of positive experience, showing how such a system
would be maintained running effectively without any financial
background provided by the zoological community. We need to see its
powers, its limitations and its acceptance by the whole zoological
community, including those who do not speak English and who do not
participate in international discussions.

In particular,

The proposed new Art. 8.1.3.1 and 8.1.3.2 should not be incuded.

Art. 8.1.3. should be modified:
"8.1.3. it must have been produced in an edition containing
simultaneously obtainable copies by a method that assures numerous
identical and durable copies, and it must be extant in at least one
surviving original copy."

Art. 8.5 as proposed should not be included.

Art. 8.5 should be modified:
"Art. 8.5. Works issued after 1985. To be published, a work must have
been printed on durable paper (by either letterpress or offset
printing, newspaper and similar paper quality is excluded) in a
minimum of 40 copies. Works issued after 2010 must have been printed
on durable paper in a minimum of 100 copies."

Art. 8.6 should be modified:
"Art. 8.6. Works issued and distributed electronically. All works
produced by a method other than printing on paper, including works
issued and distributed electronically in digital formats, are not
regarded as published work. This applies expressedly also to CD-ROMs
and DVDs issued after 1999 under Art. 8.6 of the 4th edition of the
Code. To be recognized as published work, journals publishing
primarily electronically (including open access journals) must contain
a statement printed at least once in each issue that printed copies on
durable paper of every issue are deposited in a minimum of 30 major
libraries which are identified by name in the volume itself. The
issues must be deposited and obtainable in these libraries."

The proposed new Art. 8.6 should not be included.

Art. 9 should not be modified as proposed, except 9.9 which could be
modified as proposed under Art. 9.10.

Art.9.8 should be modified:
"9.8. information issued and distributed by means of electronic
signals,"

The proposed new Art. 10.8 should not be included.
To promote stability of a widely used and well-known name established
on CD-ROM or DVD after 1999, the Commission has the right to make
available such a name from the next occasion when the name was
published on paper after the CD-ROM was issued and where the explicite
statement is wanting that this was a new species (violation of Art.
16.1).

The proposed new Art. 10.9 should not be included.

The proposed new Art. 21.8.3 should not be included.

The proposed new Art. 21.9. should not be included.

The proposed new Art. 78.2.4 should not be included.

-------------------------------------------------

Until today the following taxonomists have supported the corporate AnimalBase comment:

Göttingen team members:
Francisco Welter-Schultes - Project leader of the AnimalBase Team, University of Göttingen, Germany - Gastropoda
Sven Bradler - University of Göttingen, Germany - Phasmatodea
Oliver Eikel - AnimalBase Team, University of Göttingen, Germany - insect phylogeny
Verena Feuerstein - AnimalBase Team, University of Göttingen, Germany - Neuroptera
Thomas Hörnschemeyer - University of Göttingen, Germany - Coleoptera
Rebecca Klug - AnimalBase Team, University of Göttingen, Germany - Phasmatodea
Alexandra Lutze - AnimalBase Team, University of Göttingen, Germany - Aves
Gert Tröster - University of Göttingen, Germany - Coleoptera
Frank Wieland - AnimalBase Team, University of Göttingen, Germany - Mantodea
Rainer Willmann - University of Göttingen, Germany - insect phylogeny

External supporters (n = 102):
Andrés O. Angulo - University of Concepción, Chile - Lepidoptera (Noctuidae, Macrolepidoptera)
Robert Angus - University of London, United Kingdom - Coleoptera
Tarcisio Antezana Jerez - University of Concepción, Chile - Euphausiacea
Miguel Archangelsky - Universidad Nacional de La Patagonia, Esquel, Argentina - Coleoptera
Ulrike Aspöck - Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria - Raphidioptera, Megaloptera, Neuroptera
Martin Baehr - Zoologische Staatssammlung, München, Germany - Coleoptera (Carabidae)
Manuel Baena - I.E.S. Córdoba, Spain - Heteroptera (Reduviidae)
Daniele Baiocchi - Roma, Italy - Coleoptera (Buprestidae)
Zsolt Bálint - Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary - Lepidoptera (Papilionoidea)
Michael Balke - Zoologische Staatssammlung, München, Germany - Coleoptera (Dytiscidae)
George Beccaloni - Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom - Blattodea
David T. Bilton - University of Plymouth, United Kingdom - Coleoptera
Svatopluk Bílý - National Museum, Prague, Czech Republic - Coleoptera (Buprestidae)
Roberto Caldara - Milano, Italy - Coleoptera (Curculionidae)
Dragan Chobanov - Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Sofia, Bulgaria - Orthoptera
Carlos Núñez Cortés - Buenos Aires, Argentina - Mollusca
Adam Miles Cotton - Chiang Mai, Thailand - Lepidoptera (Papilionidae)
Georges Coulon - Powell River, British Columbia, Canada - Coleoptera (Staphylinidae)
Gabor Csorba - Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary - Mammalia (Chiroptera)
Csaba Csuzdi - Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary - Annelida (Oligochaeta)
Giulio Cuccodoro - Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle, Genève, Switzerland - Coleoptera
Nicolas Degallier - Paris, France - Coleoptera (Histeridae) and Diptera (Culicidae)
Mario Elgueta - Museo Nacional de Historia Natural, Santiago, Chile - Coleoptera
Alexandr Emeljanov - St. Petersburg, Russia - Auchenorrhyncha
Michael S. Engel - University of Kansas Natural History Museum, USA - Insecta
Ömer Köksal Erman - Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey - Coleoptera
Eduardo I. Faúndez - Punta Arenas, Chile - Hemiptera (Acanthosomatidae)
William J. Fenzan - Norfolk, Virginia, USA - Gastropoda (Conidae)
Zoltán Fehér - Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary - Gastropoda
Hans Fery - Berlin, Germany - Coleoptera (Dytiscidae)
Martin Fikácek, National Museum, Praha, Czech Republic - Coleoptera (Hydrophiloidea)
Michael Filmer - Chobham, Surrey, United Kingdom - Gastropoda (Conidae)
Javier Fresneda - Llesp-El Pont de Suert, Spain - Coleoptera (Leiodidae, Cholevinae, Leptodirini)
Edmund Gittenberger - Naturalis and Leiden University, The Netherlands - Mollusca
Folco Giusti - Università di Siena, Italy - Mollusca
Vladimir Gnezdilov - St. Petersburg, Russia - Auchenorrhyncha
Juan Horro González - Vigo, Spain - Gastropoda (Turridae)
Klaus Groh - Hackenheim, Germany - Mollusca
Angel Guerra - Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas, Vigo, Spain - Cephalopoda
Fritz Gusenleitner - Biologiezentrum Linz, Austria - Hymenoptera (Apoidea)
Matthias Hartmann - Naturkundemuseum Erfurt, Germany - Coleoptera (Carabidae)
Lars Hendrich - Zoologische Staatssammlung, München, Germany - Coleoptera (Dytiscidae)
John B. Heppner - Florida State Collection of Arthropods, Gainesville, USA - Lepidoptera
Manfred Jäch - Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria - Coleoptera
Ronald Janssen -Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum, Frankfurt, Germany - Mollusca
Manuel Jimenez Tenorio - Jerez de la Frontera, Spain - Gastropoda (Conoidea)
Kjell Arne Johanson - Stockholm, Sweden - Trichoptera
Aruna A Kanase - Shivaji University, Kolhapur, India - Laboratory animals and other animal models
Rex D. Kenner - University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada - Vertebrata and Insecta
Petr Kment - National Museum, Praha, Czech Republic - Heteroptera
André Koch - Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Bonn, Germany - Squamata
Jiri Kolibac - Moravské Zemské Muzeum, Brno, Czech Republic - Coleoptera (Cleroidea)
Bernard Landry - Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle, Genève, Switzerland - Lepidoptera
Norman Lindner - Institut für Myriapodenforschung Leipzig, Germany - Myriapoda
Ivan Löbl - Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle, Geneva, Switzerland - Coleoptera
Felix Lorenz - Buseck, Germany - Gastropoda (Cypraeidae, Ovulidae, Conidae)
Michael D. Maehr - University of Illinois, Champaign, USA - Orthoptera, Plecoptera
György Makranczy - Natural History Museum Budapest, Hungary - Coleoptera (Staphylinidae)
Giuseppe Manganelli - Università di Siena, Italy - Mollusca
Nigel Marley - University of Plymouth, United Kingdom - Tardigrada
Sergio Martínez - Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay - Mollusca and Echinodermata
Massimo Meregalli - University of Torino, Italy - Coleoptera (Curculionidae)
Ottó Merkl - Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary - Coleoptera (Tenebrionidae)
Wolfram Mey - Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin, Germany - Trichoptera and Lepidoptera
António Monteiro - Lisboa, Portugal - Gastropoda (Conidae)
Gunter C. Muller - Hebrew University, Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel - Diptera (Culicidae), Lepidoptera
Maxim Nabozhenko - Murmansk Marine Biological Institute, Rostov-on-Don, Russia - Coleoptera (Tenebrionidae)
Sven N. Nielsen -University of Kiel, Germany - Mollusca
Álvaro de Oliveira - Gulpilhares, Portugal - Mollusca
Tania S. Olivares - University of Concepción, Chile - Lepidoptera (Noctuidae, Macrolepidoptera)
Timothy A. Pearce - Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, USA - Mollusca
Fernando Pederzani - Ravenna, Italy - Coleoptera (Hydradephaga)
Pyotr N. Petrov - Moscow, Russia - Coleoptera (Hydradephaga)
Marta Pola Perez - California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, USA - Mollusca
Guido T. Poppe - Cebu, Philippines - Mollusca
Ignacio Ribera - Institut de Biologia Evolutiva, Barcelona, Spain - Coleoptera
Ira Richling - University of Kiel, Germany - Mollusca
Emilio Rolán - Vigo, Spain - Mollusca
Bernd Sahlmann -Cismar, Germany - Scaphopoda
Gianfranco Sama - Cesena, Italy -Coleoptera (Cerambycidae)
Jay M. Savage - San Diego, USA - Amphibia, non-avian Sauropsida
Günter Schweigert - Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart, Germany - Cephalopoda, Crustacea (Decapoda)
Helena V. Shaverdo - Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria - Coleoptera (Dytiscidae)
Nikolay Simov - Sofia, Bulgaria - Heteroptera
Andre Skale - Hof, Germany - Coleoptera (Hydraenidae)
Ales Smetana - Ottawa, Canada - agricultural biology
José Stuardo - University of Concepción, Chile - Mollusca and Crustacea
Charlie Sturm - Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, USA - Mollusca
Manuel Suárez Bustabad - Ferrol, A Coruña, Spain - Mollusca
Peter Subai - RWTH Aachen, Germany - Gastropoda
Miklos Szekeres - Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Szeged, Hungary - Mollusca
Juan E. Trigo - Santiago de Compostela, Spain - Mollusca
John K. Tucker - Illinois Natural History Survey, Brighton, USA - general taxonomy
Antonio Vives - Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterologia, Madrid, Spain - Lepidoptera (Microlepidoptera)
Mark G. Volkovitsh - Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia - Coleoptera (Buprestidae)
Bernhard J. van Vondel - Hendrik-Ido-Ambacht, The Netherlands - Coleoptera (Haliplidae)
Marek Wanat - Museum of Natural History, Wroclaw University, Poland - Coleoptera (Curculionoidea)
Chris Watts - South Australian Museum, Adelaide, Australia - Coleoptera
Andreas Weigel - Wernburg, Germany - Coleoptera (Cerambycidae)
Vollrath Wiese - President of the German Malacological Society, Cismar, Germany - Mollusca
Volker von Wirth - Vice President of the German Arachnological Society, Großbottwar, Germany - Araneae (Theraposidae)
Lothar Zerche - Senckenberg Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Müncheberg, Germany - Coleoptera (Staphylinidae) 

If you like to support our corporate AnimalBase comment and be added to the list, please send a short e-mail to
fwelter (at) gwdg.de
containing your name, city (and institute if you have) and country, and the animal group in which you are specialised.