I didn't comment on the dear old NODC code earlier. I'd be interested to
know why people think it's still useful, but my opinion is that it's an
approach that's going nowhere and is not needed in these days of
unlimited computer storage space. If you want a rock-solid label in a
database for something then use the binominal of the original author.
'Laubierpholoe riseri Pettibone' will be the same thing regardless of how it
is (imminently I believe) disposed of in revisions (hope this does not start
off a 'rubbish the type-concept' debate :^)), and you will not find it in
NODC (very N. American oriented).
I did use the NODC CD-Rom for getting a reasonable computer list of
annelid genera. Anyone wanting to do the same can now work online
through ITIS.
http://www.itis.usda.gov/plantproj/itis/download_data.html
--
Geoff Read <g.read at niwa.cri.nz>
-- ANNELIDA LIST
Discuss = <annelida at net.bio.net> = talk to all members
Server = <biosci-server at net.bio.net> = un/subscribes
Archives = http://www.bio.net/hypermail/annelida/
Resources = http://biodiversity.uno.edu/~worms/annelid.html
--
