1,720,963 research outputs found
A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae)
No full textPhillips, Dean P., Bytebier, Benny (2020): A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae). Phytotaxa 456 (3): 219-243, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.456.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.456.3.
FIGURE 5 in A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae)
No full textFIGURE 5. Distribution of Stenoglottis fimbriata var. modesta.Published as part of Phillips, Dean P. & Bytebier, Benny, 2020, A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae), pp. 219-243 in Phytotaxa 456 (3) on page 230, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.456.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/558592
FIGURE 6 in A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae)
No full textFIGURE 6. Selected specimens of Stenoglottis longifolia. A, flower ventral view, Nkandla Forest Reserve (KZN). B, flowers, Ngoye Forest Reserve (KZN). C–D, flower ventral view and inflorescence, Eshowe (KZN). E, flower ventral view, Krantzkloof Nature Reserve (KZN). F, flower ventral view, Shongweni (KZN). G, flowers, Noodsberg (KZN). H–J, flower ventral view, lateral view (showing spurless labellum and recurved bract) and leaf rosette (cultivated), Kranskop (KZN). K–L, flower ventral and lateral view, Ngoye Forest Reserve (KZN). M, habit (in situ), Eshowe (KZN). N–O, column lateral and ventral view, Ngoye Forest Reserve (KZN). Scale bars = 5 mm (A–L), 0.5 mm (N–O). Abbreviations: au = auricle, an = anther, stg = stigmatic arm. M reproduced with the permission of Herbert Stärker.Published as part of Phillips, Dean P. & Bytebier, Benny, 2020, A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae), pp. 219-243 in Phytotaxa 456 (3) on page 233, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.456.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/558592
Stenoglottis fimbriata Lindley 1837
No full text1. Stenoglottis fimbriata Lindley (1837: 210). (Figs 1–5) Type:— SOUTH AFRICA. Eastern Cape: between Mzimvubu and Msikaba rivers [inter Omsamwubo et Omsamcaba], Drège 4574 (holotype: K, 001208157, photo!; isotype: P, 00339739, photo!). Lithophytic, occasionally epiphytic or terrestrial. Leaves 6–20, linear to lanceolate or oblanceolate, concolourous to heavily spotted with brown or maroon, margins flat and entire to strongly undulate, up to 20 × 4 cm. Inflorescence up to 57 cm tall, 5–90 flowers; sheaths spotted or unspotted. Bracts lanceolate, acute to acuminate, spotted or unspotted, usually sheathing the ovary entirely, occasionally recurved at the apex, usually shorter than or equal to ovaries except for the lower bracts that are sometimes slightly longer than ovaries, 6.0–15.0 × 2.0– 5.5 mm. Flowers white, pink or lilac, often spotted with a darker shade of pink or purple on all parts or labellum only; self-pollinating. Sepals ovate to narrowly ovate or elliptic, acute to obtuse, dorsal concave, laterals oblique to falcate, 3.5–7.0 × 1.5–4.0 mm, laterals slightly longer. Petals ovate, oblique, acute, 3.5–6.3 × 2.0– 4.5 mm. Labellum unspurred, oblong to obovate in outline, 6.0–12.0 × 2.0– 6.5 mm, highly variable; side lobes entire to incised or bifurcating; midlobe acute, longer than or subequal to side lobes. Column up to 2.5 mm long; stigmatic arms erect or suberect in mature flowers, straight or curving outward; auricles slender or widening slightly at the apex, up to 0.6 mm × 0.4 mm at the apex, adnate to the sides of the anther. Ovary 8.5–15.0 mm long.Published as part of Phillips, Dean P. & Bytebier, Benny, 2020, A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae), pp. 219-243 in Phytotaxa 456 (3) on page 221, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.456.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/558592
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe 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
Full text link“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
Full text linkWe 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
Stenoglottis Lindley 1837
No full textStenoglottis Lindley (1837: 209). Type:— Stenoglottis fimbriata Lindley (1837: 210). Lithophytic, epiphytic or terrestrial herbs with perennial, tuberous roots, ellipsoid to elongate, cylindrical, fascicled, sometimes with a woolly velamen. Leaves annual, ca. 5–20 in a basal rosette, spreading to erect or arching, linear to lanceolate or oblanceolate, acute to acuminate or apiculate, concolourous or variously spotted with brown or maroon, glabrous, margins entire, flat to strongly undulate. Inflorescence an erect raceme, lax to dense, frequently subsecund, glabrous; cauline leaves reduced to narrowly lanceolate sheaths, unspotted or variously spotted with brown or maroon. Bracts cordate to lanceolate, acute to acuminate, shorter than or subequal to the ovaries, gradually decreasing in size along the rachis. Flowers numerous, resupinate, white, pink or lilac to mauve, often spotted with a darker shade of pink or purple. Sepals free or basally united to the column, subequal, ovate to narrowly ovate or elliptic, acute to obtuse; dorsal concave; laterals oblique to falcate, margins entire. Petals shorter than sepals, ovate, oblique, acute, folded forward to enclose the column, margins slightly lacerate. Labellum spurred or unspurred, patent, oblong to broadly obovate or cuneate in outline, often puberulous near the base, trilobed; side lobes entire or with variable additional fimbriation. Column short, ca. 2 mm; anther erect, with auricles slender to clavate, smooth or tuberculate; pollinia 2, caudicles short, viscidia round; stigmatic arms free, straight or curved; rostellum trilobed. Ovary ribbed, cylindrical; mature capsules elliptic or oblong. Key to the Stenoglottis taxa 1. Labellum with a spur..........................................................................................................................................................................2 – Labellum without a spur.....................................................................................................................................................................4 2. Labellum side lobes broad and entire, rounded or truncate, midlobe apex acute to rounded; spur tapering or sub-saccate, with or without nectar; bracts sheathing ovaries; leaves never spotted..........................................................................................................3 – Labellum side lobes incised to deeply divided, midlobe narrow, attenuate; spur saccate, without nectar; bracts sheathing or recurved; leaves unspotted or sparsely spotted............................................................................................................... S. inandensis 3. Spur to 0.4–1.5 mm long, sub-saccate, straight, without nectar; labellum midlobe acute to obtuse; flowering from December....................................................................................................................................................................................................... S. woodii – Spur 2.0–3.0 mm long, tapering, straight or recurved, nectar-producing; labellum midlobe rounded; flowering from late October................................................................................................................................................................................... S. macloughlinii 4. Labellum side lobes usually acute and entire, occasionally fringed or bifurcating; floral bracts usually sheathing ovaries entirely, occasionally recurved at the apex; auricles slender, approximately uniform in width or slightly wider at the apex, adnate to sides of the anther; self-pollinating.............................................................................................................................................................5 – Labellum side lobes usually with 2–5 fimbriae of variable length, sometimes ligulate and entire or shallowly incised; floral bracts recurved, not sheathing ovaries; auricles clavate with markedly swollen apex, projecting forward beyond the anther; never selfpollinating......................................................................................................................................................................... S. longifolia 5. Leaves variously spotted or not, margins undulate; labellum side lobes variable, acute to truncate, margins entire to shallowly incised or bifurcating; labellum base flat, spurless; life span of individual flowers variable (± two weeks).......................................................................................................................................................................................................... S. fimbriata var. fimbriata – Leaves never spotted, margins entire; labellum side lobes without additional fimbriation; minute vestigial spur at base of labellum; individual flowers short-lived (± two days)................................................................................................. S. fimbriata var. modestaPublished as part of Phillips, Dean P. & Bytebier, Benny, 2020, A taxonomic revision of Stenoglottis (Orchideae, Orchidoideae, Orchidaceae), pp. 219-243 in Phytotaxa 456 (3) on pages 220-221, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.456.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/558592
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
