Zoo Research Guidelines Getting Zoo Research Published
© British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums 2008 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. PANKHURST, S. J, PLUMB, A. C. & WALTER O. (Eds.) (2008): Zoo Research Guidelines: Getting Zoo Research Published. London: BIAZA. First published 2008 Published and printed by: BIAZA Regent’s Park London NW1 4RY United Kingdom
ISSN 1479-5647
2
Zoo Research Guidelines: Getting Zoo Research Published Edited by Dr Sheila Pankhurst1, Anna Plumb2 and Olivia Walter2 Environmental Science Research Unit, Anglia Ruskin University, East Road, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK 2 BIAZA, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY, UK
1
Contributing authors (in alphabetical order): Linda DaVolls, BSc (Hons) Head of Scientific Publications and Meetings, Zoological Society of London, Regent's Park, London NW1 4RY, UK Fiona Fisken, BSc (Hons) Editor, ZSL Scientific Books (including the International Zoo Yearbook) Zoological Society of London, Regent's Park, London NW1 4RY, UK Dr Sonya Hill Research Officer, North of England Zoological Society, Chester Zoo, Caughall Road, Upton, Chester CH2 1LH, UK Dr Nicola Marples Lecturer, Department of Zoology, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland Heidi Mitchell, BSc (Hons) Research Programme Manager, Marwell Zoological Park, Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire SO21 1JH, UK Dr Sheila Pankhurst (Editor) Environmental Science, Department of Life Science, Anglia Ruskin University, East Road, Cambridge, CB1 1PT Dr Amy Plowman Head of Field Conservation & Research, Whitley Wildlife Conservation Trust, Paignton Zoo Environmental Park, Totnes Road, Paignton, Devon TQ4 7EU, UK Dr Stephanie Sanderson Veterinary Manager, North of England Zoological Society, Chester Zoo, Caughall Road, Upton, Chester CH2 1LH, UK Dr Miranda Stevenson Director, BIAZA, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY, UK Dr Angela Turner Managing Editor, Animal Behaviour, School of Biology, University of Nottingham University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
3
Acknowledgements These guidelines are a result of a workshop organized by the BIAZA Research Group and hosted at Colchester Zoo in July 2006. All of the contributing authors were participants at the workshop. We were very fortunate to have three experienced journal editors at the workshop; Dr Angela Turner (Managing Editor, Animal Behaviour), Dr Martin Fisher (Editor, Oryx) and Fiona Fisken (Editor, ZSL Scientific Books, including the International Zoo Yearbook). Their comments and advice have improved these guidelines considerably and we are most grateful for their input. Others who participated in the workshop are listed below and we acknowledge their valuable contributions to these guidelines. Particular thanks also go to Fay Clark and Colchester Zoo, for allowing us to hold the workshop in their conference centre and for making all the practical arrangements, and Linda DaVolls, Head of Scientific Publications and Meetings, The Zoological Society of London, who did not attend the meeting, provided information about relationships with editors and reviewers for Section 7.
Workshop participants (in addition to the contributing authors)
(in alphabetical order)
Dr Sue Dow Capital Projects and Science Coordinator, Bristol Zoo Gardens, Clifton, Bristol BS8 3HA, UK Dr Andrea Fidgett Nutritionist, North of England Zoological Society, Chester Zoo, Caughall Road, Upton, Chester CH2 1LH, UK Dr Martin Fisher Editor, Oryx, Fauna and Flora International, Jupiter House, 4th Floor, Station Road, Cambridge CB1 2JD, UK Dr Geoff Hosey Honorary Professor, School of Health and Social Studies, University of Bolton, Bolton BL3 5AB. Dr Vicky Melfi Senior Zoo Research Officer, Whitley Wildlife Conservation Trust, Paignton Zoo Environmental Park, Totnes Road, Paignton, Devon TQ4 7EU, UK Dr Charlotte Nevison Senior Lecturer in Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Environmental Sciences Research Centre, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK Rob Thomas, MSc BSc (Hons) Conservation and Research Manager, The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland Edinburgh Zoo, Edinburgh EH12 6TS, UK Olivia Walter, MSc BSc (Hons) (Editor) Zoo Programmes Coordinator, BIAZA, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY, UK
4
Contents 1. Introduction (A. Plowman and S. Pankhurst) 1.1 What are these guidelines for? 1.2 Why are these guidelines needed?
2. Why Publish Zoo Research? (N. Marples)
2.1 Disseminating useful information 2.2 Enhancing the reputation of your zoo, and of zoos in general 2.3 Attracting funding 2.4 Summary – “Why publish?”
3. The Scope of Zoo Research (M. Stevenson) 4. Quality of research (A. Plowman) 5. Where to publish (S. Pankhurst, S. Sanderson, S. Hill and H. Mitchell) 5.1 Which journals publish zoo research? 5.2 How to choose the right journal 5.3 Impact factors
6. Publication Ethics and Copyright (A. Turner) 7. Relationships with editors and reviewers (L. DaVolls) 7.1 Submission 7.2 Peer review 7.3 Publication
8. Presentation of your paper (F. Fisken) 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7
Know your audience Use the “Instructions for Authors” provided by the publisher Authors and acknowledgements Consistency Photographs, figures and tables Accuracy References 8.7.1 Style – general notes 8.7.2 Order of reference list 8.7.3 Styles of reference 8.8 General points 8.9 Useful books
5
1. Introduction Amy Plowman and Sheila Pankhurst
1.1
What are these guidelines for?
This volume aims to give zoo researchers, including students and keepers, clear guidelines to enable them to get their research published and into the public arena. The gold standard for scientific research is publication of your findings in a peer-reviewed journal – preferably one with a high “impact factor”. Peer-reviewed journals (and impact factors) are discussed in more detail in subsequent sections of these guidelines, but for now, a quick definition of a peer-reviewed or refereed journal is, “a scholarly or research publication in which the articles submitted for publication are evaluated by a group of individuals who are expert in the subject area” (Keenan & Johnston, 2002). These guidelines will help you to identify the steps you need to take to get your zoo research paper published. N.B. ‘zoo’ refers to any animal collection that is open to the public. This therefore includes aquariums.
1.2
Why are these guidelines needed?
Zoo research is under-represented in the published literature. There is a lot of good research being carried out in zoos and aquariums that is not getting published. This may be for one of two reasons; either papers are being rejected by editors, or papers are not being submitted to journals in the first place (possibly owing to the perception that they will not be published). It seems that there is a common perception that much research carried out in zoos is not a scientifically worthwhile activity. The most common reasons given for this are that animals in zoo environments are not “natural” and that robust statistical analyses are not possible. However, with recent developments in husbandry methods and naturalistic housing and social groupings, most modern zoos now provide an extremely useful research setting; bridging the gap between highly controlled, but often extremely unnatural, laboratory conditions and the totally natural but very difficult working conditions of the field. Small sample size is often a problem of zoo research which presents statistical challenges, but valid and robust statistical tests are possible for typical zoo datasets (see research guidelines on statistics). These guidelines provide the much needed information on how and where to publish.
6
2. Why publish zoo research? Nicola Marples There are three main reasons why zoo researchers should publish their work, and why they should aim for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
2.1
Disseminating useful information
It is a waste of time to do research that no-one ever hears about. Any research, whether it is conducted in a zoo, in the wild or elsewhere, may teach the researcher something interesting about the animal or animals studied, or the best methodology to use to answer questions about those animals. It may be that the research reveals just how NOT to design such a study. However, something can be learned from almost every study and that knowledge is only useful to the researcher unless (and until) other people are told about it. Zoo research that is not published will not benefit anyone else and probably will not benefit the animals studied. Even if the researcher is in a position to put into practice what has been learned, other people may have to repeat the experiment or observations in order to learn the same information before they can develop or advance such studies. Making the knowledge obtained available to other people is a necessary part of any scientific research activity – not just zoo research – and publication is as important as any other part of a study. Findings can be disseminated on a number of levels. You can simply tell colleagues at your own zoo what you have found. Or write an article outlining the findings for newsletters or websites, such as Shape of Enrichment, Ratel or LifeLines (the BIAZA magazine). Or go to a conference for zoo staff and researchers and present a paper or poster. Any of these methods of broadcasting results are extremely important for passing on the information to others who are in a position to benefit from it, and should be undertaken for the main results of every zoo-based study. An added advantage is that you may also benefit from talking to other researchers about their experiences. However, these avenues for disseminating work only pass on the information to a zoobased audience in a fairly restricted geographical range. If findings are likely to be useful to a wider group, then data should be made available on a worldwide level. This is especially the case if the results could be useful to people who do not work in zoos, but who keep animals for other reasons or are interested in animal biology. In order to reach this wider audience, there is really no better method than writing a paper for one of the peer-reviewed journals. These are available online or as paper copies worldwide, and because articles go through a rigorous reviewing process, they are also considered trustworthy sources of information that make up the body of knowledge upon which future researched is based. Any new information that is reported upon may add to the archive of what is known about zoo animals and it will be available for everyone to access ad libitum.
2.2
Enhancing the reputation of your zoo, and of zoos in general
Publication of good-quality research enhances the reputation not only of the researcher but also of the zoo or zoos in which the work was carried out.
7
At a more fundamental level, zoos in the UK need to be active in research in order to qualify for a licence to hold animals (Defra, 2003). Activity in research is most easily and unambiguously measured by published output from research projects. Publishing papers will add an organization to the fraternity of zoos which are undeniably research active. In addition, the public are becoming increasingly aware of the need for research into conservation and management of captive populations. Journalists as well as academic researchers look at the contents of academic journals to uncover the latest science stories, and a zoo which is regularly quoted in the literature will be recognized as highly research active. Therefore, journalists will be much more likely to use that zoo as a source of information. Zoo staff may be invited to be experts on media programmes. The zoo would then develop a reputation as a “good zoo” in the eyes of the public, known for carrying out interesting research, promoting the conservation and welfare of their animals, and full of experts who understand the animals they care for. Other research-active zoos and interested parties will also be reading the literature and be aware of which zoos are carrying out research that is good enough to be published. Thus, the worldwide reputation of the zoo as a modern, active organization will be hugely enhanced by published papers in journals.
2.3
Attracting funding
Funding for future research projects is dependent, to some extent, upon the results of previous research projects. Successful project supervisors and researchers are far more likely to get funding than those without a proven track record. However, “success” in this context really means presenting published information. The number and quality of papers produced by a researcher provides evidence of their track record. However successful you are, for example, at solving a behavioural problem or explaining the challenges of captive breeding in the animal studied, it does not count towards enhancing the ability to obtain further funding until the results are published in a reputable journal.
2.4
Summary – “Why publish?”
Publishing is extremely important not only for your reputation as a researcher but also for the worldwide reputation of your zoo as a research-active, modern organization. Publishing may also increase the chances of obtaining funding to support additional research projects. These guidelines have been put together to help achieve these aims and to suggest appropriate journals to publish in. However, the most important step in getting work published, and the most usual obstacle, is actually writing the paper. Most research-project proposals include a written report as the end point. When planning a study and seeking institutional and financial support time should be allowed at the end of the project to write a paper for publication, as a study is not complete until the results can be widely verified and known.
8
3. The Scope of Zoo Research Miranda Stevenson Zoos and aquariums are not just places to see animals: in order to attract and inspire visitors with the wonders of the natural world, they have to be efficiently run businesses. And if they are to practice what they preach they also have to be run on sound environmental principles. Zoos and aquariums in Britain and Ireland are mainly Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs), that depend on paying visitors for most of their income. They also (by law) have to carry out conservation and educational activities (Zoo Licensing Act 1981). As visitor attractions they require good general facilities, well trained and welcoming staff, excellent eating places, toilets and retail outlets – a wide remit and one which encompasses the potential for a range of research topics, most successfully carried out in partnership with Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs). Zoos and aquariums also attract historians, and there is an impressive body of research on their history and changes in attitude towards keeping wild animals in captivity. Business schools can carry out projects on running SMEs in competitive environments. This research can range from marketing and PR projects, catering and retail to consumer studies. As zoos and aquariums are increasingly being run on sound environmental principles, there is scope for considerable research on ethical consumerism and what affects the decision to visit and visitor expectations. Animal collections provide a huge resource for potential research, all of which can add new knowledge to our understanding of the biology of wild animals and their management in captivity. Examples of topics are: • Captive-breeding programmes and zoo records • Work on nutrition and reproduction in different species • Veterinary and medical work, including analysis of post mortem data • Use of dead animals for anatomical and taxonomic studies • Species studies and studies of behavioural changes owing to enrichment, group and other environmental changes, or the effects of enclosure design on behaviour. • Public/animal interactions Visitor Studies offer great potential and a range of topics, such as: • Evaluation of interpretation and knowledge transfer and the potential for behavioural change • Visitor behaviour • Attitude of visitors to animals Field conservation also involves research and the collection of data. Many zoos and aquariums are involved with native species projects, sometimes within the zoo grounds. Areas include: • Native species research within zoo grounds • Native species research with other partners, such as Natural England, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Council for Wales. • Field conservation research in other countries, often with other non-governmental partners, both local and other • Research into the behaviour and ecology of wild animals • Human impact and wildlife research Traditionally most zoo research has been carried out on animal collections and covers a range of topics (see Benirschke, 1996; Burghardt et al., 1996; FitzRoy Hardy, 1996 for 9
reviews). A review of research in Association of Zoos and Aquarium (AZA) member collections by Stoinski et al. (1998) showed that research topics included reproduction, behaviour, education, cognition, animal health, nutrition, genetics and visitor studies. Much can be gleaned by carrying out surveys of zoo research published in peer-reviewed journals and using this methodology. Rees (2005a) showed that most zoo research was concerned with behaviour, environmental enrichment, nutrition and reproduction. He suggests that zoos are not carrying out sufficient conservation research, a position resulting in an interesting debate (Rees, 2005b; Thomas, 2005; Wehnelt & Wilkinson, 2005). Evaluation of education and conservation activities. Evaluating the contribution that zoos and aquariums make to conservation is a worthy research topic in its own right. Zoos are being encouraged to develop methods to measure their success in contributing to conservation although some areas, such as the evaluation of field-conservation projects, are notoriously difficult to study (Cambridge Conservation Forum (CCF), 2007). The Catalysts for Conservation meeting held at ZSL London Zoo in 2004 presented the results of some such research projects (Balmford et al., 2007; LeaderWilliams et al., 2007; Mace et al., 2007). Zoos and aquariums are now devising methods to evaluate whether or not visitors are receiving and, more importantly, acting upon the many important messages provided in a zoo visit (Hayward & Rothenbers, 2004; Yalowitz, 2004) This is currently a developing area of zoo research (AZA, 2006). In summary, zoos and aquariums offer exciting and challenging opportunities for a wide range variety of potential research projects but much of this potential is currently under utilized. AZA (2006): Multi-institutional Research Programme (MIRP) http://www.aza.org/ConEd/MIRP/ Balmford, A., Leader-Williams, N., Mace, G. M., Manica., A., Walter, O., West, C. & Zimmerman, A. (2007): Message received? Quantifying the impact of informal conservation education on adults visiting UK Zoos. In Zoos in the 21st Century: Catalysts for Conservation?: 120–136. Zimmerman, A., Hatchwell, M., Dickie, L. & West, C. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Benirschke, K. (1996): Current research activities in zoos. In Wild Mammals in Captivity: Principles and Techniques: 537–544. Kleiman, D. G., Allen, M. E., Thompson, K. V. & Lumpkin, S. (Eds). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Burghardt, G., Bielitzki, J. T., Boyce, J. R. & Schaeffer, D. O. (1996): The Well-Being of Animals in Zoos and Aquari um Sponsored Research. Greenbelt, MD: Scientists Center for Animal Welfare. Cambridge Conservation Forum (CCF) (2007): http://www.cambridgeconservationforum.org.uk/ Defra (2003): Zoo Licensing Act, 1981 (amended 2002). London: Defra. http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/gwd/govt-circular022003.pdf FitzRoy Hardy, D. (1996): Current research activities in zoos. In Wild Mammals in Captivity: Principles and Techniques: 531–536. Kleiman, D. G., Allen, M. E., Thompson, K. V. & Lumpkin, S. (Eds). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hayward. J. & Rothenbers, M. (2004): Measuring success in the Congo gorilla forest 10
conservation exhibit. Curator 47: 261–282. Keenan, S. & Johnston, C. (2002): Concise Dictionary of Library and Information Science (2nd edn). London: Bowker Saur. Leader-Williams, N., Balmford, A., Linkie, M., Mace, G. M., Smith, R. J., Stevenson. M., Walter, O., West, C. & Zimmerman, A. (2007): Beyond the ark: conservation biologists' views of the achievements of zoos in conservation. In Zoos in the 21st Century: Catalysts for Conservation?: 236–254. Zimmerman, A., Hatchwell, M., Dickie, L. & West, C. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mace, G. M., Balmford, A., Leader-Williams, N., Manica, A., Walter, O., West, C. & Zimmerman, A. (2007): Measuring conservation success: assessing zoos' contribution to conservation. In Zoos in the 21st Century: Catalysts for Conservation?: 322–342. Zimmerman, A., Hatchwell, M., Dickie, L. & West, C. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rees, P. A. (2005a): Will the EC Zoos Directive increase the conservation value of zoo research? Oryx 39: 128–131. Rees, P. A. (2005b): Towards a research-based conservation identity for zoos - a reply to Wehnelt and Wilkinson and Thomas. Oryx 39: 135–136. Stoinski, T. S., Lukas, K. E. & Maple, T. L. (1998): A survey of research in North American zoos and aquariums. Zoo Biology 17: 167–180. Thomas, R. (2005): Internal drive vs. external directive: the delivery of conservation through zoo-based research - a response to Rees. Oryx 39: 134. Wehnelt, S. & Wilkinson, R. (2005): Research, conservation and zoos: the EC Zoos Directive a response to Rees. Oryx 39: 132–133. Yalowitz, S. S. (2004): Evaluating visitor conservation research at the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Curator 47: 283–298.
11
4. Quality of Research Amy Plowman To publish research in peer-reviewed journals it is first necessary to conduct publishable quality research. This involves having an original and sufficiently interesting research question, collecting and analysing data using appropriate methods and statistical tests, and writing about your research and results in the context of existing published research relevant to the subject. Doing all of this to an acceptable standard for publication is difficult for experienced researchers and nigh on impossible for inexperienced researchers. Therefore, to achieve peer-reviewed research publications a zoo must either employ staff trained in research techniques to a high level (usually PhD) or it must collaborate very closely with appropriate staff at academic institutions. Collaborations with academic institutions can be very beneficial for all parties, but they need to be well-defined from the outset to ensure, among other things, that appropriate recognition in terms of authorship and affiliations is given to all parties when work is published (see section 8.3). There is often good potential for zoo staff to be co-supervisors of PhD students and this is can be a very good way to ensure the zoo’s contribution to research is appropriately recognised in publications. There is no quick and easy way to become a good researcher, either in zoos or elsewhere. Features of good zoo research are those in common with any other biological research – precise testable hypotheses, sound methodology to collect data relevant to the hypotheses, appropriate statistical analysis and critical interpretation. However, there are some challenges that are more frequently encountered during zoo research than in other fields, such as small sample sizes, little control over experimental manipulations, very different conditions across zoos for multi-zoo studies and the need to fit in with husbandry procedures (some predictable, others not). Other volumes in this series of research guidelines, produced by the BIAZA Research Group, will help researchers overcome many of these zoo-specific challenges and produce better quality zoo research. However, individual undergraduate projects in any field are rarely of publishable quality. Thus, if a zoo’s research activity is limited to hosting undergraduate student researchers the zoo is never likely to achieve peer-reviewed publications. That is not to say undergraduate projects are not useful. They can uncover much valuable information, particularly if students are directed towards research questions of interest to the zoo. Also, if properly co-ordinated by a more experienced researcher, individual undergraduate projects can contribute to a larger dataset that can be analysed and developed into publishable quality research by the co-ordinating researcher. Again this requires an experienced researcher, either within the zoo or working very closely with the zoo, to direct and supervise students to achieve the necessary quality of research.
12
5. Where to publish Sheila Pankhurst, Stephanie Sanderson, Sonya Hill and Heidi Mitchell
5.1
Which journals publish zoo research?
The authors of this section found a total of 83 journals which had published zoo-based research between 2004 and 2006, although zoo research papers were a scarce occurrence in most of these journals (78 published fewer than five papers in that two year period). The vast majority of zoo papers appeared in Zoo Biology, (a journal concerned with the “reproduction, demographics, genetics, behaviour, medicine, husbandry, nutrition, conservation and all empirical aspects of the exhibition and maintenance of wild animals in wildlife parks, zoos, and aquariums”), in Applied Animal Behaviour Science, and in the Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, a veterinary journal. Others journals included Animal Welfare and American Journal of Primatology. List of publications from Web of Knowledge, using “zoo” as the key search term, from from 01/01/2004 to current date (results in alphabetical order by journal name) Details of the topic of the papers are only provided for publications that are not primarily concerned with zoo animals. Publication A-Z Acoustics Research Letters Online Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica Acta Theriological Acta Veterinaria Brno American Journal of Physical Anthropology American Journal of Primatology
Animal Biotechnology Animal Reproduction Science Animal Welfare
No. of papers 2004 to 06 1
Brief summary of topic •
1
•
1
•
1 1
• •
5
• • • •
1 1 7
• • • • • •
Anthrozoos
3
• • • • • •
vocalisations in Sumatran rhinos BSE – a review (incl. zoo infections) fluid/particle retention times in black rhino blood composition of ungulates enclosure design to demonstrate brachiation birth records for snub-nosed monkeys hamadryas baboon clans chimpanzee demography at Taronga Zoo reproductive parameters in captive mangabeys sexual behaviour in lowland gorillas mtDNA marker in a pheasant species training programme for captive breeding of felids enrichment and stereotypies in vicuna computer assisted enrichment for orangutans influence of camouflage netting on gorillas stress in wild otters held in a zoo facility animal learning – veterinary applications stereotypies as a welfare indicator faecal corticoids and stress responses training in colobus zoo architecture – changes in building 13
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
• • • •
use the birth of the modern zoo reproductive success in zoo macaques gorilla behaviour index exhibit design and visitor responses space use and exhibit design in chimps/gorillas visitor effects in macaques visitor effects in zoo gorillas stereotypies in bears behaviour and welfare of macaques cholesterol in wild vs. captive lemurs appliance of science to zoo primates zoo environment and primate behaviour visitor effects in spider monkeys primate popn. management – welfare issues foraging in captive hamadryas baboons corals in public aquaria ruminal kinetic parameters feline gut parasites
2
• •
ruminal kinetic parameters feline gut parasites
1 1 2
• • • •
1
•
infection in a bald eagle carcinomas in ducks – Philadelphia zoo stereotypies in captive brown bears visual/attentional orientation in pileated gibbons toxoplasma in white storks
1 1
• •
inbreeding depression in captive gazelles heavy metals in liver and kidneys
1 1 1
• • •
PIT tagging Gaur genetics properties of elephant blood
1
•
salivary proteins in captive rhinoceros
1
•
1 1 1 1
• • • •
discovery of a zoo specimen of a rare primate genetic diversity in an extinct stork transportation of coral larvae DNA indices disease in captive turtles
2
• • •
14
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Aquatic Conservation Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinaria e Zootecnia Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinaria e Zootecnia Avian Diseases Avian Pathology Behavioural Processes
1 2
Berliner Und Munchener Tierarztliche Wochenschrift Biological Conservation Biological Trace Element Research Bioscience Chromosome Research Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Contributions to Zoology Conservation Genetics Coral Reefs Cytometry Part A Diseases of Aquatic Organisms Emerging Infectious Diseases Endeavour
2
tiger-tiger transmission of H5N1 West Nile virus in a Barbary macaque history of American bison and US National Zoo 14
• • • • • • • •
European Journal of Wildlife Research Folia Primatologica
2
Folia Zoologica Indian Veterinary Journal
1 2
International Journal of Infectious Diseases International Journal of Primatology
1
•
4
• •
2
•
science in zoos in the 19th century breeding of Barbary lions dissection of an African elephant activity cycle, w-f lemurs primate locomotor activity infanticide in captive zebras wounds on an hippopotamus outbreaks of disease in Indian zoos – a review shigellosis outbreak at Vienna Zoo aspects of captive breeding of gibbons aggression/reconciliation in ring-tailed lemurs scent marking and reprod. strategies in r-t lemurs digestive passage in two captive gorillas funding for elephant disease research outbreaks of zoonotic enteric disease zoonotic disease outbreaks
1
• • • • •
1
•
welfare of zoo animals
1
•
digestive physiology of Indian rhino
1
•
Salmonella infection in captive reptiles
1
•
1 1 1 3
• • • •
experimental feeding of ostrich eggs to carnivores simian HIV in a Schmidt’s guenon genetic diversity in Vietnamese sika deer infanticide in zebra
Journal of Psychophysiology Journal of Thermal Biology
1 1
• • • •
Journal of The South African Veterinary Association Journal of Zoo And Wildlife Medicine
1
•
first report of Dirofilaria in a Humboldt penguin infection in Japanese macaques toxoplasmosis in Pallas’ cats visitor effects in chimpanzees temperature and stereotypies in Asian elephants spondylosis in an European brown bear
13
• • • • • • • • • • •
blood thiamine levels in captive lions helminths in cervids measles in captive primates mortality in captive giraffe Cryptosporidium and Giardia infection carcinoma in a lemur species vaccine responses in various species contraceptive injections for zoo felids pancreatic fibrosis in rock hyraxes renal myxosporadiasis in horned frogs avian malaria vaccine – test in penguins
JAVMA – Journal Of The American Veterinary Medical Association Journal of the Acoustic Society of America Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition Journal of Applied Microbiology
3
Journal of Archaeological Science Journal of General Virology Journal of Heredity Journal of Mammalogy Journal of Parasitology
song intensity in siamang gibbons
15
Journal of Veterinary Medical Science
3
• • •
Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation Journal of Wildlife Diseases
1
• • •
1
•
Journal of Zoology
2
• • • •
Lancet Infectious Diseases Lecture notes in computer science Materials evaluation Medycyna Weterynaryjna
1
exotic tick control in Komodo dragons rabies vaccination for captive fruit bats outbreak of infection in zoo primates in Japan canine distemper in captive lions in Japan intestinal microflora in crows West Nile virus in reindeer faecal steroid analysis for pregnancy detection in sheep breeding success in captive koalas vocalisation in musk oxen avian influenza in zoo tigers zoo information system software
1 2
• • •
1 1
• •
non-destructive testing of zoo cages zoo primate spongiform encephalopathy reproductive monitoring in captive equids Cryptococcosis in a striped grass mouse ryegrass staggers in a white rhinoceros
1 1
• •
zoo animal meat for human consumption heminths in a giraffe
2
•
Parasitology Research
1
• •
Point Veterinaire Primates Revista Brasileira de Entomologia Revista Brasileira de Zoologia Schweizer Archiv Fur Tierheilkunde Society and Animals Systematic Parasitology
1 1 1
• • •
EC zoos directive and zoo conservation (Rees) response to Rees Cryptosporidium in mammals and reptiles methods of restraint for zoo mammals taste and food selection in apes lice on zoo birds
3
•
Three papers on rheas (by same authors)
2 1 2
• • • •
Tierarztliche Praxis Ausgabe Grosstiere Nutztiere Trends in Parasitology
1
• •
zoonoses in petting zoos echinococcosis in primates zoos and pornography description of new parasite species in Testudinidae new species of quill mites blood composition in bison
1
•
Vaccine Veterinary Microbiology
1 2
• •
Veterinary Journal
2
Veterinary Parasitology
4
Mycoses New Zealand Veterinary Journal New Scientist Onderstepoort Journal Of Veterinary Research Oryx
• • • •
Cryptosporidium and Giardia infections in captive wild animals avian flu Mycobacteria in captive New World primates isolation of orf viruses in zoo ruminants Mycobacterium survey – Antwerp Zoo Leptospirus antibodies in wild felines Toxoplasma in zoo animals 16
Veterinary Quarterly Veterinary Record
Virology Zoo Biology Zoological Studies
1 3
• • • • •
1 25 1
• • • • •
antibodies in Brazilian cervids parasites in ungulates gullet worm in squirrel monkeys leptospirosis in captive seals fenbendzadole to treat parasites in ruminants TB outbreak in captive Asian elephants avian influenza in zoo tigers H5N1 virus in zoo tigers Various topics ECGs in captive macaques
Other possible journals (not listed in the table above) to consider, for the publication of zoo-based research, particularly aquarium-based [A. Sharp pers. com.] as this was not searched for above: Aggressive Behaviour Animal Behaviour * Animal Behaviour Applied Animal and Behaviour Science Aquaculture Aquaculture Research Behavioural Ecology Coral Reefs Diseases of Aquatic Organisms Ecology of Freshwater Fish Environmental Biology of Fishes Environmental Conservation Freshwater Biology Ichthyological Research Journal of Applied Ichthyology Journal of Crustacean Biology Journal of Experimental Biology Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology Journal of Fish Biology Journal of Molluscan Studies Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Journal of Shellfish Research Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom Journal of Veterinary Science Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine Mammalia Mammalian Biology Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology Marine and Freshwater Research Marine Biology Marine Ecology Small Ruminant Research (e.g. work by Jim King on personality in zoo chimpanzees) Theria A
Using the search term “zoo” drew a blank for publications in Animal Behaviour between 2004 and 2006. Using the search term “captive”, however, yielded perhaps a dozen papers based on work carried out in, or in association with, zoos or aquaria. *
17
5.2
How to choose the right journal
Before writing your paper, you should have an idea of where you are going to try and get it published. Choosing the right journal largely depends on why you are publishing it. For example you might aim to ; 1) archive a study in a journal that is widely accessible. This kind of research might only be “local” in itself but could contribute to a meta-analysis (e.g. Oryx) 2) reach a specific audience in a journal that they might read (e.g. Neotropical Primates), 3) present the article to donors, journalists or policy-makers and so choose a journal that specialises in glossy articles with colourful pictures Each journal has its own particular audience, topic and style. A good paper may be rejected because it is submitted to the wrong journal. There is a hierarchy of ‘prestige’ among journals, which to some extent is measured by impact factor (see below). Submitting to very prestigious journals can sometimes mean a long wait before publication. However, you may get lucky and you will get good reviews and feedback, though it is helpful to be thickskinned and not in a hurry. For topics where speed of publication is paramount (e.g. conservation), then time taken to turn around a paper will be a more important factor when choosing a journal. The point of publishing research is to make it available to everyone. Therefore choosing a journal that makes at least the abstracts available to search engines such as Web of Knowledge, Zoological Record and Google Scholar should be a consideration. By reading a few issues of the journal you think might be most appropriate for your paper, you will see the type of language and style previous authors have been successful with. This should guide you when preparing your paper for submission, as you may wish to ‘tweak’ your writing so that it fits with what you know the journal is likely to appreciate. However, this is unlikely to mean that the referees have no comments for you to consider! Before submitting a paper to any journal, please read Chapter 6: Publication Ethics and Copyright.
5.3
Impact factors
The impact factor of a journal is effectively a measure of how often articles published in that journal are cited by other articles published collectively in all journals. In a sense, impact factors measure a journals “influence”, that is a journal’s likelihood of being picked up and read by a greater number of scientists. If you want to reach a larger and perhaps broader audience, then higher impact factors are better. Indeed, this is what many researchers feel is the best strategy. However, it is worth revisiting your reasons for publishing when considering this. If you are targeting a specific audience with your findings, it may be better to select a specialty journal which by it’s very function, may also have lower impact factor. Clearly, decisions about which are the most appropriate journals for you to publish in should not be made purely on the impact factor. Most journals have their own website, and the impact factor is usually given on the home page. For example, the website for Animal Behaviour gives an impact factor of 2.711 in 2006. The journal Zoo Biology, by comparison, had an impact factor of 0.779 in the same year (Nature scored 26.681!).
18
6. Publication Ethics and Copyright Angela Turner Editors expect authors to be honest about the content of manuscripts submitted to their journals. Thus, results and other parts of the paper should not be fictitious or doctored, plagiarised (i.e. copied from another published or submitted work without attribution) or duplicated in another publication, whether already published or submitted for publication. The consequences of dishonesty can be severe; journal editors may bar dishonest authors from publishing in the journal again. While there is no excuse for intentional fraud, there are some grey areas. For example, authors may sometimes be unaware that they are using other peoples’ ideas and results, perhaps from papers read some time ago. A good literature search is therefore essential when writing a paper, to ensure that all published material is properly attributed. Authors may also be unaware of what counts as duplicate publishing. Most journals will only publish work that has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. In part this is to avoid infringement of copyright. In addition, part of the remit of high-quality international journals in particular is to publish original work, so editors do not want results that are already known to the scientific community. The definition of prior publication is not always clear to authors, however, and can vary between journals. The results are the main novel part of a paper and so prior publication of the results is likely to lead to a journal declining to publish the submitted manuscript. The prior publication may be in another journal, the proceedings of a conference or a book, with an ISSN or ISBN. Authors need to be particularly careful about abstracts that summarise the results and are published in conference proceedings. If these contain details of the data, with for example descriptions of methods, results and conclusions, they are likely to count as prior publication of the work. Similarly, data given in a book may well be seen by a journal editor as published and therefore not suitable for inclusion in a subsequent journal article. Authors who wish to publish the work elsewhere should check with the editors of conference proceedings before submitting an abstract; authors may have the option of not having an abstract published, or if they do to publish only a brief summary of the results without giving any data. Such a qualitative description of the results would not be seen as prior publication; nor would abstracts that are only handed out to conference delegates and are not published in conference proceedings. Authors are allowed to include some published material, such as a figure or part of a data set, in a paper submitted to a journal, but they should make it clear in the cover letter exactly what has been published and where, and the source of the material should be given in the manuscript. It will help the journal editors if they receive a copy of the published material when the new article is submitted so that they can see the extent of the overlap for themselves. For copyright material, authors will need to obtain a letter from the owners of the copyright (usually the publishers) granting permission to reproduce it. This is the case even if the published material is the author’s own work. Repeating a Methods section from one of your own published papers because your methods were the same is a breach of copyright, for example. It would also be regarded as duplicate publishing by journal editors, as would submitting two papers with the same Methods section to two different journals. If in doubt about the acceptability of material before submitting a paper to a journal, authors can always get in touch with the editor for advice. Editors are usually happy to help and would rather do so at an early stage when a problem can be rectified than have to reject an otherwise sound and interesting paper.
19
7. Relationships with editors and reviewers Linda DaVolls
7.1
Submission
Owing to high numbers of submissions, the majority of peer-reviewed journals will reject a number of papers prior to review. Oryx and Animal Conservation reject approximately 35% of papers prior to review. In most cases, the editor will indicate why the paper is considered unsuitable and an alternative journal may be suggested. On submission, a paper should be accompanied by a cover letter to the editor (no more than a single side of A4). The cover letter should: • highlight the ways in which the paper falls within the journal’s Aims and Scope • describe the relevance of the research to the zoo research community and how the paper furthers our knowledge in a particular field/subject area • make the editor aware of the limitations of the study (e.g. be transparent about the sample size, explain that the statistical approach used is appropriate for the sample size) • state that the research complies with BIAZA guidelines • include a list of potential referees (with contact details) Zoo researchers should make editors aware of the BIAZA Research Group as a source of potential referees. Editors seek publishing authors to review submissions and so it is important that the reference list includes other research published within the subject area. Editors should also be encouraged to look at the BIAZA Statistical Guidelines, which describe the zoo-research community’s approach to the issue of comparability and small sample sizes. It may be advisable to mention if the paper has previously been rejected by another journal, as papers could be sent to the original reviewers. It is important to explain the changes made since rejection. When submitting to another journal re-format the manuscript to conform with the new journal’s guidelines (and ensure that all reviewer comments are deleted).
7.2
Peer review
Once a paper is considered suitable, it will be sent to two/three reviewers for comment. Editors may send the paper to a third referee if there is a strong disagreement between the first and second referees. Reviewers will be asked to rate the paper in a number of areas including: • relevance to the journal • significance to the area of research • novelty • appropriateness of methods • clarity of writing and illustrations • extent of interest beyond the particular species/habitat The reviewers will also be required to make a recommendation for acceptance, minor revision, major revision, reject and resubmit, reject.
20
If a paper is rejected take the reviewer and editors’ comments on board, rewrite the paper and submit to another journal. The peer-review process is a means by which papers are refined and improved, and it may take several submissions before the paper is finally accepted.
7.3
Publication
Published authors can improve the perception of academic work carried out in zoos by listing their papers on the BIAZA website.
21
8. Presentation of your paper Fiona Fisken General guidelines for publishing zoo research in peer-reviewed journals
8.1
Know your audience
When presenting research keep in mind the audience for which you are writing. For readers of a general-interest journal, what is obvious to you may need explaining to them, especially if they are not specialists in your subject. Explain the details of, for example, dimensions, substrates and furnishings of enclosures, the methods used to gather data, the time period of data collection and relevant information about the focal species (such as number, gender and age of animals studied). The more detailed the information in the article the more robust the results. Where possible use statistical tests to validate data if conclusions are going to be drawn from them. If writing for a specialist journal (e.g. on enrichment) then it may not be necessary to explain specialist terms but, in general, it is better to start with full explanations and reduce the information if deemed necessary by referees. The most basic rule is only use the words you need to use. The aim of publishing your work is to disseminate the details of your study, data, methods and conclusions. The more complicated the language the more difficult it is for readers to assimilate your work.
8.2
Use the “Instructions for Authors” provided by the publisher
Nearly all publishers supply comprehensive “instructions for authors”, either on Web sites or on request. It is a really good idea to read these and follow the instructions. The closer the style and layout of your article is to the required house style, the less work it will require and referees can concentrate on the contents of the study and not be distracted by presentation.
8.3
Authors and Acknowledgements
'Authors' are considered to be those who have contributed a substantial amount of the work described. This can be through significant contributions in planning the work, collecting and analysing the data or writing the paper. Others who have made only a small contribution should be credited in the acknowledgements. An exception to this may be a supervisor’s name which tends to be put last.
There is a very good summary of current issues relating to authorship in science available at: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/services/authorship.cfm This considers the balance between credit and responsibility for published research. Other published guidelines on authorship can often be traced back to guidelines determined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, widely adopted by the broader scientific publishing community. These are very comprehensive and provide the following criteria for authorship credit: 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3. [From http://www.icmje.org]
22
Where there are multiple authors, the lead author (the one who has done the most writing) should be first followed by authors either alphabetically or in descending order of work done. For large research groups, the head of the research group is frequently listed as the last author
8.4
Consistency
Use either UK or US spellings: do not mix the two. If using abbreviations use them consistently. Whatever you do, do it throughout the article.
8.5
Photographs, figures and tables
Digital photographs should be >300 dpi to print well. Low-resolution photographs will be grainy and dull once printed. Provide copyright citations for images and obtain permission to use images from the copyright holder when necessary. Use as little shading as possible in line art and remove “gridlines” on graphs. The simpler the figure the easier it is for readers to understand the information presented. Ensure that column headings in tables are aligned with the entries below them. Photographs, figures and tables should have legends that stand on their own as descriptions of the contents.
8.6
Accuracy
Pay special attention to numbers and dates in the text. If mistakes are not noticed early then they may not be spotted before publication. Check the spelling of all scientific names in reference books. Do not use officious, pompous and/or discriminatory language.
8.7
References
The reference list is vitally important. Providing a full list of articles/books/reports referred to during the course of your study demonstrates that you have researched your subject thoroughly. A good reference list also enables readers to find the background references to read for themselves. With modern technology it is often possible to source articles on the Internet. Give as many details as possible in the references, following the house style requested by the publisher. There are two main systems for citing references: Harvard (author names and dates) and Vancouver (numbered references). Double check all references cited in the text are given in the reference list and all the references in the list are mentioned in the text. Put references at the end of the sentence where possible.
8.7.1 Style - General notes
Standards used by most publishers include • year usually in brackets (1998) 23
• • •
journal/series and book titles italic Folia Primatologica Walker's Mammals of the World volume numbers bold 36: page-numbers range, using en rule 42–48
et al. has a full point at the end of al. [abbreviation of et alii ] Brown, A. B. (1992a) Brown, A. B. (1992b) Brown, A. B., Green, C. D., Smith, E. F. & Jones, G. H. (1992a) Brown, A. B., Green, C. D., Smith, E. F. & Jones, G. H. (1992b) in text as Brown et al. (1992a,b) or (Brown et al., 1992a,b) but Brown, A. B., Smith, E. F., Green, C. D. & Jones, G. H. (1992) Brown, A. B., Green, C. D., Smith, E. F. & Williams, G. H. (1992) in text as Brown, Smith et al. (1992) or (Brown, Smith et al., 1992) and Brown, Green et al. (1992) or (Brown, Green et al., 1992) do not use a and b because they are not the same combination of authors in one year order of references in text: listed chronologically, then alphabetically, unpublished, pers. comm./pers. obs (Warner & James, 1988; Brown, 1989; Green, 1990; Jackson et al., 1990; Alder, unpubl.; J. Smith, pers. comm.) pers. comm.: (A. Johnson, pers. comm.) appears in text but not in reference list (use initial and surname) pers. obs: no full point after obs [contraction of observations] same surnames but different authors, use initials to differentiate: (Durrell, G., 1996; Durrell, L., 1996) unpubl. data or unpubl. report appear in text (not in reference list) (use initial and surname): (E. Brown, unpubl. data) unpublished report, such as (Adler & Peter, unpubl.), will appear in the reference list Adler, H. J. & Peter, W. P. (Unpublished): Cuc Phuong National Park Conservation Program, North Vietnam. Internal report of the Zoological Society of Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, 1991.
8.7.2 Order of reference list (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
One or two authors: alphabetical Three or more: chronological then alphabetical (et al. three/four or more authors) van Lint (with lower case v) is listed under L for Lint Van Loot (with upper case V) is listed under V for Van In press: in text (Fred, in press); in references Fred, J. (In press): …
24
(6) Articles submitted for consideration for publication are cited as unpublished data (B. Author, unpubl. data) until they are accepted for publication, at which point they are “in press” and are cited in the reference list
8.7.3 Style of references
1. Chapter in a book a. name(s) of author(s), editor(s), compiler(s) or institution responsible; b. year of publication; c. chapter title; d. book title (book titles in italics with scientific names in Roman); e. volume number (in bold); f. page numbers; g. name(s) of editor(s) (surname and initials) and (Ed.) or (Eds); h. town in which publisher located; i. name of publisher Leus, K., Morgan, C. A. & Dierenfeld, E. S. (2001): Nutrition. In Babirusa (Babyrousa babyrussa) Husbandry Manual. Fischer, M. (Ed.). Silver Spring, MD: American Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Olbricht, G. & Sliwa, A. (1995b): Comparative development of juvenile black-footed cats at Wuppertal zoo and elsewhere. In International Studbook for the black-footed cat 1995: 8–20. Olbricht, G. & Schürer, U. (Eds). Wuppertal: Wuppertal Zoo. Snyder, R. L. & Terry, J. (1986): Avian nutrition. In Zoo & Wild Animal Medicine (2nd edn): 189–200. Fowler, M. E. (Ed.). Philadephia, PA: W. B. Saunders. Soini, P. (1988): The pygmy marmoset, genus Cebuella. In Ecology and Behavior of Neotropical Primates 2: 79–129. Mittermeier, R. A., Rylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & da Fonseca, G. A. B. (Eds). Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund. 2. Journal/Series reference. a. name(s) of author(s); b. year of publication; c. title of article (scientific names in italic); d. journal name/series title (in italics); e. volume number (in bold) and issue number (not in bold) if used; f. page numbers. For foreign-language titles use upper and lower case letters as in original article Buay, J. & Thirunavukkarasu, R. (2000): Breeding Pesquet’s parrot Psittrichas fulgidus at Jurong BirdPark. International Zoo Yearbook 37: 158–165. Olbricht, G. & Sliwa, A. (1995a): Analyse der Jugendentwicklung von Schwarzfusskatzen (Felis nigripes) im Zoologischen Garten im Vergleich zur Literatur. Der Zoologische Garten (N.F.) 65: 224–236. Quris, R. (1975): Ecologie et organisation social de Cercocebus galeritus agilis dans le nordest du Gabon. Terre Vie 29: 337–398. [English summary.] Wilkinson, R. (1995): Last stand in Indonesia: fate of the Sumatran tiger. The Lamp 77(3): 7– 77. 3. Book. a. name(s) of author(s), editor(s), compiler(s) or institution responsible; b. year of publication; c. book title (book titles in italics with scientific names in Roman); d. volume number (in bold); e. edn number (if not first); f. town in which publisher located; g. name of publisher Hill, W. C. O. (1974): Primates: Comparative Anatomy and Taxonomy. 7. Cynopithecinae: Cercocebus, Macaca, Cynopithecus. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
25
IUCN/UNEP/WWF (1991): Caring for the Earth: a Strategy for Sustainable Living. Gland: IUCN/UNEP/WWF. Nowak, R. M. (1991): Walker's Mammals of the World 1 (5th edn). Baltimore & London: Johns Hopkins University Press. Samour, J. (Ed.) (2000): Avian Medicine. London: Harcourt Publishers Limited. 4. Thesis reference. Title in italics with scientific names Roman, giving degree, university and place Botts, S. E. (2000): The development of psychometric scales to measure sense of place. PhD dissertation, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. Reed, C. E. M. (1986): The maintenance and reproductive behaviour of black stilts Himantopus novaezelandiae in captivity, and implications for the management of this rare species. MSc (Hons) thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand. 5. Published report Green, A. J. (1992b): The status and conservation of the white-winged wood duck Cairina scutulata. Special Publication No. 17. Slimbridge: International Waterfowl and Wetlands Research Bureau. Jeggo, D. (1976): Lesser Antillean parrot programme, a progress report. Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust. Annual Report No. 13: 21–26. 6. Unpublished report. Title in italics with scientific names Roman, giving year at end Bencke, G. A. (Unpublished): The ecology and conservation of the blue-bellied parrot Triclaria malachitacea in forest fragments in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Final report to Universidade Estadual Paulista—UNESP, 1996. Bennett, C. L. & Lindsey, S. L. (Unpublished): Mother–infant relationships and the behavioral budgeting of four okapi (Okapia johnstoni) calves during the first six months of life. Report to the Animal Behavior Society at the annual meeting, Wilmington, NC, 1991. 7. Conference proceedings Böer, M. (1988): Notes on the reproduction, maintenance and captive conservation of three West-African primates: the drill, the mandrill and the cherry-crowned mangabey. In Proceedings 5th World Conference on Breeding Endangered Species in Captivity: 27– 37. Dresser, B., Reece, B. & Maruska, E. (Eds). Cincinnati, OH: Zoological Society of Cincinnati. Exceptions to this rule: some conference proceedings are published frequently and are cited as series (AAZPA, AZA, Avian Vets, etc), using year in bold to act as volume number Flower, S. S. (1931): Contributions to our knowledge of the duration of life in vertebrate animals. 5. Mammals. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1931: 145–234. Fuller, G. B., Hobson, W. C., Reyes, F. I., Winter, J. S. D. & Faiman, C. (1984): Influence of restraint and ketamine anaesthesia on adrenal steroids, progesterone and gonadotropins in rhesus monkeys. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 175: 487–490.
26
Kenton, B. & Millam, J. R. (1994): Photostimulation and serum steroids of orange-winged amazon parrots. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Association of Avian Veterinarians 1994: 437. Morrissey, J., Reichard, T., Janssen, D., Lloyd, M. & Bernard, J. (1994): Vitamin D deficiency in Colobinae monkeys. Proceedings of the American Association of Zoo Veterinarians 1994: 381–383. Sodaro, V., Pingry, K. & Snyder, K. (1994): Changes in handrearing procedures for Callimico goeldii at Brookfield Zoo. AAZPA Regional Conference Proceedings 1994: 404–407. 8. Symposia from ZSL and technical bulletins from the International Council for Bird Preservation. Report as a journal-type items; issue number is Roman not bold Corbet, G. B. (1970): Patterns of subspecific variation. Zoological Society of London Symposia No. 26: 105–116. Croxall, J. P., Evans, P. G. H. & Schreiber, R. W. (Eds) (1984): Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. International Council for Bird Preservation Technical Bulletin No. 2: 1–779. 9. Citing electronic sources. Either cite electronic sources in reference list (if there is enough information) or in text; give date that the site was accessed and avoid putting full point at the end of citation, where possible IUCN (2006): 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Gland and Cambridge: IUCN. http://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed 10 February 2008). In text: The development of a Web site for husbandry guidelines and conservation research needs is being discussed (http://www.species.net). Information about participation can be obtained at
[email protected]
8.8
General Points
abbreviation: (use full stops)
Anon. comm. Ed. Fig. pers. Prof. suppl.
Anonymous communication Editor Figure personal Professor supplement
authorities for scientific names are Roman not italic: Lophocebus albigena (Gray) Sarcoramphus papa L. Perodicticus potto Miller c. for circa and not ~ for approximately common names, on first mention, must have a full scientific name attached contraction: (do not use full stops)
Dr edn Eds
Doctor edition Editors 27
Figs Jr obs
Figures Junior observations
dimensions: length x breadth x height/width/depth; qualify final dimension with, for example, high or deep 10 cm x 7 cm x 10 cm deep or 6 m x 4 m x 2 m high en rules (–): sperm–egg interaction, dose–response curve, blood–brain barrier, north–south orientation, Hilborn–Walters Principle, predator–prey relationships, do not use hyphens figures are graphs and line drawings mass: use this for measurements: the bird had a body mass of 10 g on day 4 (not weight) P upper case italic for probability P=0.05 or P>0.5 plates are photographs scientific names should be given in full on first mention and after that genus can be abbreviated: Great spotted kiwi Apteryx haasti on first mention but A. haasti thereafter. If scientific name begins a sentence, however, it is again in full. Apteryx haasti nests ... singular/plural: watch a total ... has; a pair ... has (not have) Numbered lists in text Where possible try to run-on lists, e.g. The most commonly accepted approaches include: (1) providing animals with some ...; (2) furnishing the enclosures with ... Make sure the sentence before colon links up to the rest of the list: “Monitoring enables: (1) assessing the needs ...” does not work; use Monitoring enables: (1) the assessment of the needs ... Numbers, dates, dimensions 5–20 cm for a range (– is en rule) but “from 5 to 20 cm” or “between 5 and 20 cm” Only use en rule when range is not linked to “from” or “between”, etc 14.25 years should be written as 14 years 3 months either g day-1 or g/day (grams per day) use 10 April 1993 do not use 10.4.93 because in USA = October 4, 1993 and in UK = 10 April 1993
8.9 • • • •
Useful books Butcher, J. (1992): Copy-editing. The Cambridge Handbook for Editors, Authors and Publishers (3rd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 0-521-400740 Huth, E. J. (Ed.) (1994): Scientific Style and Format. The CBE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers (6th edn). Council of Biology Editors, Inc. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 0-521-47154-0 Ritter, R. M. (Ed.) (2000): The Oxford Dictionary for Writers & Editors (2nd edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 0-19-866239-4. A good English dictionary. 28
•
A Thesaurus is useful (and fun) but not essential.
29
