6,748 research outputs found
Open access self-archiving: An author study
No full textThis, our second author international, cross-disciplinary study on open access had 1296 respondents. Its focus was on self-archiving. Almost half (49%) of the respondent population have self-archived at least one article during the last three years. Use of institutional repositories for this purpose has doubled and usage has increased by almost 60% for subject-based repositories. Self-archiving activity is greatest amongst those who publish the largest number of papers. There is still a substantial proportion of authors unaware of the possibility of providing open access to their work by self-archiving. Of the authors who have not yet self-archived any articles, 71% remain unaware of the option. With 49% of the author population having self-archived in some way, this means that 36% of the total author population (71% of the remaining 51%), has not yet been appraised of this way of providing open access. Authors have frequently expressed reluctance to self-archive because of the perceived time required and possible technical difficulties in carrying out this activity, yet findings here show that only 20% of authors found some degree of difficulty with the first act of depositing an article in a repository, and that this dropped to 9% for subsequent deposits. Another author worry is about infringing agreed copyright agreements with publishers, yet only 10% of authors currently know of the SHERPA/RoMEO list of publisher permissions policies with respect to self-archiving, where clear guidance as to what a publisher permits is provided. Where it is not known if permission is required, however, authors are not seeking it and are self-archiving without it. Communicating their results to peers remains the primary reason for scholars publishing their work; in other words,
researchers publish to have an impact on their field. The vast majority of authors (81%) would willingly comply with a mandate from their employer or research funder to deposit copies of their articles in an institutional or subject-based repository. A further 13% would comply reluctantly; 5% would not comply with such a mandate
[ULEAD] Photograph of Alma Solis
No full textAlma Solis at the University Leadership Education and Development (ULEAD) Completion Ceremony.https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/utbphotographs/1384/thumbnail.jp
Distinguished Alumnus Award 2003, Maria Alma Solis, Ph.D.
No full textDistinguished Alumnus Award recipient of 2003. Maria Alma Solis, Ph.D. is a research entomologist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Smithsonian Institution. Texas Southmost College Alumna ’75
Texas Southmost College introduced me to the world of science and I would not be where I am today if it were not for the early guidance and inspiration from my college professors from. I was very lucky to have chosen to attend TSC.
Maria Alma Solis is a research entomologist with the United States Department of Agriculture at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington D.C. She is one of the world’s foremost experts on a little known family of moths.
Solis earned an Associate of Arts degree from TSC in 1976. She went on the University of Texas at Austin and earned a bachelor and masters degree in chemistry. She received her doctorate from the University of Maryland at College Park.https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/utbmedia/1029/thumbnail.jp
Open access self-archiving: An Introduction
No full textThis, our second author international, cross-disciplinary study on open access had 1296 respondents. Its focus was on self-archiving. Almost half (49%) of the respondent population have self-archived at least one article during the last three years. Use of institutional repositories for this purpose has doubled and usage has increased by almost 60% for subject-based repositories. Self-archiving activity is greatest amongst those who publish the largest number of papers. There is still a substantial proportion of authors unaware of the possibility of providing open access to their work by self-archiving. Of the authors who have not yet self-archived any articles, 71% remain unaware of the option. With 49% of the author population having self-archived in some way, this means that 36% of the total author population (71% of the remaining 51%), has not yet been appraised of this way of providing open access. Authors have frequently expressed reluctance to self-archive because of the perceived time required and possible technical difficulties in carrying out this activity, yet findings here show that only 20% of authors found some degree of difficulty with the first act of depositing an article in a repository, and that this dropped to 9% for subsequent deposits. Another author worry is about infringing agreed copyright agreements with publishers, yet only 10% of authors currently know of the SHERPA/RoMEO list of publisher permissions policies with respect to self-archiving, where clear guidance as to what a publisher permits is provided. Where it is not known if permission is required, however, authors are not seeking it and are self-archiving without it. Communicating their results to peers remains the primary reason for scholars publishing their work; in other words, researchers publish to have an impact on their field. The vast majority of authors (81%) would willingly comply with a mandate from their employer or research funder to deposit copies of their articles in an institutional or subject-based repository. A further 13% would comply reluctantly; 5% would not comply with such a mandate.
In a separate exercise we asked the American Physical Society (APS) and the Institute of Physics Publishing Ltd (IOPP) what their experiences have been over the 14 years that arXiv has been in existence. How many subscriptions have been lost as a result of arXiv? Both societies said they could not identify any losses of subscriptions for this reason and that they do not view arXiv as a threat to their business (rather the opposite -- this in fact the APS helped establish an arXiv mirror site at the Brookhaven National Laboratory)
Acalyptris argentosa Stonis & Remeikis & Diškus & Solis 2017, comb. nov.
No full textAcalyptris argentosa (Puplesis & Robinson, 2000), comb. nov. Glaucolepis argentosa PUPLESIS & ROBINSON, 2000: 57. The species is known from Central America (Belize). The host plant remains unknown. On the basis of our current re-examination, this species, previously with uncertain and provisional taxonomic position (see Puplesis & Robinson 2000), is transferred from the genus Glaucolepis Braun to Acalyptris Meyrick (a description and figures of a re-examination of the male genitalia, wing venation and wing scaling, with formerly unnoticed but hardly visible and very specific androconia, will be presented by Stonis & Remeikis, in prep.).Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Remeikis, Andrius, Diškus, Arūnas & Solis, M. Alma, 2017, The American species of the genus Glaucolepis Braun, 1917 (Neotrifurcula van Nieukerken, syn. nov.) (Lepidoptera: Nepticulidae), pp. 489-506 in Zootaxa 4338 (3) on page 502, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4338.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/103702
Manitischeria omani Stonis & Diškus & Solis & Monro 2021, comb. nov.
No full text6. Manitischeria omani (Puplesis & Diškus, 2003), comb. nov. Tischeria omani Puplesis & Diškus 2003: 108–109. Host plant. Unknown. Distribution. Oman: Northern Region. Remarks. The species was illustrated by Puplesis & Diškus (2003): figs. 203, 204 (adult), figs. 238–246 (male genitalia). Female is unknown.Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Diškus, Arūnas, Solis, M. Alma & Monro, Alexandre K., 2021, Diagnostics of Manitisheria gen. nov., an Old-World genus of leaf-mining Tischeriidae, composed of new species and species formerly in Tischeria Zeller, pp. 251-287 in Zootaxa 4964 (2) on page 259, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4964.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/470928
Manitischeria unca Stonis & Diškus & Solis & Monro 2021, comb. nov.
No full text12. Manitischeria unca (Diškus & Stonis, 2014), comb. nov. (Figs. 25, 52, 53, 55–57) Tischeria unca Diškus & Stonis, in Stonis et al. 2014b: 144–148. Host plant. Unknown. Distribution. Far East Russia (Primorskiy Kray).Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Diškus, Arūnas, Solis, M. Alma & Monro, Alexandre K., 2021, Diagnostics of Manitisheria gen. nov., an Old-World genus of leaf-mining Tischeriidae, composed of new species and species formerly in Tischeria Zeller, pp. 251-287 in Zootaxa 4964 (2) on page 260, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4964.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/470928
Asturodes encisoensis Guanacaste & Alma Solis & Rodríguez & Hallwachs & Dapkey 2020
No full textAsturodes encisoensis Solis, new species http://zoobank.org/ ACB16A3F-6593- 4AED-9150-5526F0AE7136 (Figs. 4, 7, 11, 18–19, 23) Diagnosis.—Forewing with a dark brown line on M2 near margin, only a spot on M1 with no dark brown bar to reniform spot, reniform spot a dark brown “upside down U” over a “right-side up U” (Figs. 4, 11, see red circle); male genitalia with uncus tip pointed (Fig. 18); female genitalia with signa on corpus bursae in two dorsal longitudinal lines (Fig. 23). Description.—Adult. Head: Scape posteriorly with a few dark brown scales, vertex only with yellow scales. Labial palpus (Fig. 7) with first and second segments yellow and with a dark brown band anteriorly, only dorsally, third segment minute, dark brown on male, yellow on female. Proboscis with yellow scales throughout, without dark brown scales as proboscis curves under. Thorax: Average forewing length 8.25 mm (n = 8) in males, 8.42 mm (n = 7) in females. Forewing pattern as in Figures 4 and 11, a dark brown line posterior to M2 near margin, only a spot on M 1 with no dark brown line to reniform spot, reniform spot a dark brown “upside down U ” over a “right-side up U ” (Fig. 11, see red circle); no dark brown markings in radial area between reniform spot and postmedial line; first lengthwise line of zigzag between Rs3 and Rs4 shortened, almost a spot; second lengthwise line of zigzag between Rs4 and M 1 very short, a spot; antemedial line incomplete. Abdomen: Third abdominal tergite with anteromedial dark spot and two lateral triangles, fourth tergite with anteromedial dark spot, fifth tergite with silver transverse band posteriorly (Fig. 4). Male genitalia (Figs. 18–19) uncus with very short, lateral setae; uncus "tip" pointed and prominent. Parateguminal androconia oblong, broader anteriorly. Valva with fibula, or sclerotized, fingerlike process extending only slightly beyond saccular margin. Juxta medially with a lightly sclerotized, single line. Phallus vesica with large spinules. Female genitalia (Fig. 23) with ductus bursae with a square-like antrum about 2 mm in width, followed by two elongate, sclerotized structures within that are as wide as the band, strongly constricted and then ductus bursae three times as wide as antrum forming a lightly sclerotized pouchlike structure, then constricted at entrance to corpus bursae. Corpus bursae round, signum two longitudinal lines, half the length of corpus bursae. Ductus seminalis originating shortly after antrum. Etymology.—The species epithet “ encisoensis ” is a noun derived from the name of the type locality, Teniente Agripino Enciso National Park in Paraguay, and “ ensis,” a Latin suffix meaning place. Distribution.—This species is found in one of the protected natural areas of the Paraguayan Chaco in the Teniente (Lieutenant) Agripino Enciso National Park in northwestern Paraguay, in the Argentinian Chaco in Las Brenas in northern Argentina, and in northern Venezuela just to the west and outside of Parque Nacional Aguaro-Guariquito. Biological remarks.—Adults are attracted to lights. Nothing is known about the larval biology of this species. Type Material.— HOLOTYPE ♂: PARAGUAY: Dep [ar]tamento Nueva Asuncion, Parque Nacional Teniente Enciso, 61 ° 39 ̍ W, 21 ° 13 ̍ S, M. Pogue and M.A. Solis, 26‒28 March, 1986 [USN- MENT01116302]. PARATYPES: 1♂, same data as holotype [USNMENT01116303]. ARGENTINA: Chaco, 1♂, Las Brenas, Lot No. 40-25771, 18.XII.1940, H.L. Parker, [USNMENT01116300]. VEN- EZUELA: Guarico: Hato Masaguarat: 2♀♀, 45 km S Calabozo, 67.58W 8.57N, Gal [le]ry Forest, uv light, 25.V.1988, M. Epstein and C. Canaday, USNM slide #115503 [USNMENT01116288, USNMENT01116293]; 1♂, 1♀, 13‒ 16.V.1988, M. Epstein and R. Blahnik USNM slide #115504, #115501 [USN- MENT01116290, USNMENT0111 6294]; 1♂, 1♀, 20.V.1988, M. Epstein and R. Blahnik, USNM slide #115639 [USNMENT01116296; USNMENT0- 1116295]; 2♂♂, 3‒5.VI.1988, M. Epstein [USNMENT01116291, USN- MENT01116292]; 1♀, 5‒7.VII.1989, M. Epstein [USNMENT01116297]; 1♀, 13‒14.VII.1989, M. Epstein, USNM slide #115638 [USNMENT01116301]; 1♀, 20‒21.IX.1990, M. Epstein and J. Wilterding III [USNMENT01116298]; [Hato Flores Morades, but same data as above], 1♂, 5‒7.VII.1989, M. Epstein and M. Deza, USNM slide #115502 [USN- MENT01116299].Published as part of Solis, M. Alma, Rodríguez, Eugenie Phillips-, Hallwachs, Winnie, Dapkey, Tanya & Janzen, Daniel H., 2020, Asturodes Amsel (Lepidoptera: Crambidae: Spilomelinae): Three New Species From The Western Hemisphere And Food Plant Records From Area De Conservación Guanacaste, Costa Rica, pp. 147-171 in Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 122 (1) on pages 167-168, DOI: 10.4289/0013-8797.122.1.147, http://zenodo.org/record/372474
Manitischeria kumatai Stonis & Diškus & Solis & Monro 2021, comb. nov.
No full text13. Manitischeria kumatai (Sato, Kobayashi & Hirowatari, 2016), comb. nov. (Fig. 1) Tischeria kumatai Sato, Kobayashi & Hirowatari, in Kobayashi et al. 2016: 136–138. Host plant. Tilia japonica (Miq.) Simonk. (Malvaceae) (Kobayashi et al. 2016). Distribution. Japan: Hokkaido and Honshu (Nagano Prefecture). Remarks. The species was illustrated by Kobayashi et al. (2016): fig. 2 F, G (adult), fig. 4 A–G (male genitalia), fig. 4 H, I (female genitalia). The leaf mine was not illustrated, but it resembles the mine of Coptotriche minuta Diškus & Stonis according to Kobayashi et al. (2016).Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Diškus, Arūnas, Solis, M. Alma & Monro, Alexandre K., 2021, Diagnostics of Manitisheria gen. nov., an Old-World genus of leaf-mining Tischeriidae, composed of new species and species formerly in Tischeria Zeller, pp. 251-287 in Zootaxa 4964 (2) on page 261, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4964.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/470928
Manitischeria sparmanniae Stonis & Diškus & Solis & Monro 2021, comb. nov.
No full text8. Manitischeria sparmanniae (Puplesis & Diškus, 2003), comb. nov. (Figs. 69–73) Tischeria sparmanniae Puplesis & Diškus 2003: 267–268. Tischeria sparmanniae Puplesis & Diškus, in Puplesis et al. 2004: 43, 45, 48, 49. Host plant. Sparrmannia ricinocarpa (Eckl. & Zeyh.) Kuntze (Malvaceae). Distribution. Republic of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia. Material examined. Paratypes: 2 ♂, NAMIBIA: Brandberg, Wasserfallfläche, elevation 1940 m, 20.iii.2001, W. Mey, genitalia slide nos. AD0433 ♂, AD1023 ♂ (ZIN). Remarks. We provide the first photographic documentation of the male genitalia (Figs. 69–73). Two paratypes, previously deposited at LEU (=VPU), will be transferred to ZIN (see Material and Methods).Published as part of Stonis, Jonas R., Diškus, Arūnas, Solis, M. Alma & Monro, Alexandre K., 2021, Diagnostics of Manitisheria gen. nov., an Old-World genus of leaf-mining Tischeriidae, composed of new species and species formerly in Tischeria Zeller, pp. 251-287 in Zootaxa 4964 (2) on page 259, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4964.2.2, http://zenodo.org/record/470928
- …
