1,720,965 research outputs found
A “mystery fossil” is evidence for massive Devonian trees in Australia
No full textMcLean, Graham (2017): A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia. Records of the Australian Museum 69 (2): 101-118, DOI: 10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.1661, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.166
Figure 8 in A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia
No full textFigure 8. Growth habits of arborescent lycopsids: (a) Lepidodendron reconstruction (after D. A. Eggert, as cited in Taylor, Taylor & Krings, 2014); (b) Lepidophlois; (c) Diaphorodendron; (d) Sigillaria (b, c, d after Phillips & DiMichele, 1992).Published as part of McLean, Graham, 2017, A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia, pp. 101-118 in Records of the Australian Museum 69 (2) on page 111, DOI: 10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.1661, http://zenodo.org/record/523765
Figure 4 in A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia
No full textFigure 4. Possible juxtaposition of a Griffith specimen impression pattern with a typical lycopsid leaf cushion specimen (AM F.60491, Lepidodendron undulatum from Belgium). (Scale of the Griffith specimen is greater than that of AM F.60491).Published as part of McLean, Graham, 2017, A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia, pp. 101-118 in Records of the Australian Museum 69 (2) on page 105, DOI: 10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.1661, http://zenodo.org/record/523765
Figure 3 in A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia
No full textFigure 3. Process of digital reconstruction. (a) Step 1, the specimen was photographed from multiple angles; (b) step 2, a three dimensional image of the specimen surface was constructed; (c) step 3, the three dimensional surface was rotated through 180°, revealing the impressing object surfaces; (d) step 4, the unimpressed surfaces were removed, leaving only an image of the impressing object surfaces; (e) step 5, sections of the image were copied and matched to other sections of the repetitive image, creating a repetitive grid; (f, g, h) the final image was rotated through various angles to aid identification. See also 360-degree video (McLean, 2017).Published as part of McLean, Graham, 2017, A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia, pp. 101-118 in Records of the Australian Museum 69 (2) on page 104, DOI: 10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.1661, http://zenodo.org/record/523765
Figure 5 in A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia
No full textFigure 5. Australian Late Devonian lycopsid specimens. Original taxonomic identifications are used. (a) AM F.68472, cast of holotype Lepidodendron (Bergeria) tetragonum Sternberg var. australe McCoy, 1874 from the Avon River, Victoria; (b) AM F.106082,Lepidodendron sp. from Cowra, NSW, showing distal extremity with microphyll leaves; (c) AM F.46924, Leptophloem australe compression from Hattons Corner, NSW; (d) AM F.6485, Leptophloem australe from Goonoo Goonoo, NSW, showing vascular scars; (e) AM F.38375, Leptophloem australe from Barraba, NSW, showing vascular scars; (f) AM F.14899, Leptophloem australe from Bingara, NSW; (g) AM F.58480, Lepidosigillaria yalwalensis from Bunga Head, NSW; (h) AM F.68538, Lepidodendron nothum from Drummond Ranges, Queensland (Tenison-Woods, 1883); (i) AM F.49870, Lepidodendron volkmannianum from Yetholme, NSW, showing imbricating effect. All scale bars 20 mm.Published as part of McLean, Graham, 2017, A "Mystery Fossil" is Evidence for Massive Devonian Trees in Australia, pp. 101-118 in Records of the Australian Museum 69 (2) on page 107, DOI: 10.3853/j.2201-4349.69.2017.1661, http://zenodo.org/record/523765
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe 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
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
- …
