1,721,513 research outputs found

    Indagine sulla presenza di Thrips palmi in Friuli Venezia Giulia nel 2008.

    No full text
    Thrips palmi Karny è un tisanottero Tripide originario del Sud-Est asiatico, dove è comunemente noto come “melon thrips” o “palm thrips”. La specie è stata descritta nel 1925 su esemplari raccolti su tabacco in Indonesia. Le palme non sono le piante ospiti del fitofago; il nome si riferisce allo studioso B. T. Palm, al quale la specie è dedicata. È un Tripide ampiamente polifago, anche se le Solanacee e le Cucurbitacee rappresentano le piante ospiti elettive; fra le piante ornamentali predilige il crisantemo, il ciclamino e le orchidee. Attualmente la specie è presente, oltre che in numerosi Paesi asiatici, anche in America Centrale e nei Caraibi. È stata occasionalmente rinvenuta in Nord e Sud America, Africa e Oceania (OEPP/EPPO, 1989)

    Fiori, A, QX9118

    No full text
    This record was harvested from a previous catalogue system and will be withdrawn in 2025. Information in this record may be superseded or incomplete. Visit this record in UMA's new catalogue at: https://archives.library.unimelb.edu.au/nodes/view/385125Surname: FIORI. Given Name(s) or Initials: A. Military Service Number or Last Known Location: QX9118. Missing, Wounded and Prisoner of War Enquiry Card Index Number: 5564.230867 Item: [2016.0049.17418] "Fiori, A, QX9118

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore