After the Angers conference, I have not been lucky enough as to be in any
other one. To be in Madrid was an excellent chance to see and talk with some
colleagues and old friends. Surely, there were more friends which I could not
identify, and failed to enjoy their conversations. Sorry about that. Hope to
share some time in the future.
I want to bother you with some comments or recommendations for our future
meetings. Hope you find them useful.
1) Posters sessions. I wish we could have more time for the poster sessions
and a nice space for them. If they are too many or too crowded, then you may
loose reading the information or talking with colleagues working on similar
projects to your own. Then, hope we can have more time for posters; however,
time is scarce so it must be taken from the oral sessions, not from the mid-
conference excursion, since this is an important reason to make the trip, I
2) Oral sessions. This modality is much preferred than the poster session. It
takes 20 min, you will be on your feet during less time, and if your verbal
capabilities are as reduced as mine, then there may be no questions at all.
OK? However, most orals might be better placed as posters, since they invite
discussions, which may not be easily held in the auditorium because of time or
language limitations. Therefore, oral sessions should be more carefully
selected by authors and by the local committee, and their time should be 50%
of the total time for the conference. Otherwise, the poster session will be
rejected and colleagues will keep on thinking that posters are for second-
class or on-going contributions, so they can be ignored.
3) Conference frequency. One of the potential explanations for the inflation
in the number of contributions is that we meet every 3 yr. Why have we
remained in that frequency? Perhaps during the starting period, there were few
colleagues with permanent positions, most participants had to save money
during that time to make the trip, or that might better fit the PhD research
time. I think we are an increasing group that should meet more frequently,
perhaps every 2 yr.
4) Journal. During a short walk back to the dorm in Madrid, I enjoyed talking
with Paul Schroeder about our lack of journal. He remembered that starting
Invertebrate Biology was difficult, but thought it would be easier now,
especially if we make it as an e-journal. We can wait 3 yr to publish our
conference contributions; then, do we need a journal? If so, why do we lack a
journal of our own? We have plenty of serious highly qualified scientists as
to make several Editorial Committees, and most colleagues always find some
time to read and help us improve our mss, so they could be excellent referees.
We will certainly need some money for administrative issues and some special
efforts to make it have an adequate impact factor, so any potential author may
feel interested to contribute with the journal. Any idea on the feasibility?
Any idea on the costs?
Sergio I. Salazar-Vallejo, Dr.
Depto. Ecologia Acuatica
ECOSUR, Apdo. Postal 424
Ave. Centenario km 5.5
Chetumal, Quintana Roo
Tel. Mexico: (983) 835 0440, Ext. 295
Tel. from abroad: 52 (983) 835 0440, Ext. 295
salazar at ecosur-qroo.mxsavs551216 at hotmail.com
-- 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://www.annelida.net/