24-03-2026 19:59
William Slosse
Hello everyone,On 23/03/26, I found the following
21-03-2026 15:13
Lepista ZacariasHello everyone, Does any one know of any literatu
24-03-2026 21:37
Elisabeth StöckliBonsoir,Sur bois (tronc) très pourri de conifère
24-03-2026 21:07
Ethan CrensonHello all, A friend collected this asco in a wood
23-03-2026 20:16
Miguel Ángel Ribes
Good eveningI'm unable to identify this Coprotus o
24-03-2026 15:44
Åge OterhalsI hope someone can confirm the name of this collec
20-10-2017 09:23
Garcia SusanaEste otro crecía en el mismo trocito de madera qu
The next issue of the American publication "Fungi Magazine" (which I sometimes help edit) will contain an article on use of chemical reagents in mycology. I noted that the author argues only for use of MLZ and against use of IKI. I suggested changes and instead the publisher would like either me or Hans-Otto Baral to write an article on the use of IKI in the study of lichens, Heliotiales and some pyrenomycetes (and the value of studying living material) for a future issue of "Fungi Magazine." I do not think that I am the best choice. Advice?
I think I have written enough articles on these two topics. The mentioned article should include a short summary of my atricles and give their reference.
Articles to mention:
Baral, H.O. (1987). Lugol's solution/IKI versus Melzer's reagent: hemiamyloidity, a universal feature of the ascus wall. – Mycotaxon 29: 399–450.
Baral, H.O. (1987). Der Apikalapparat der Helotiales. Eine lichtmikroskopische Studie über Arten mit Amyloidring. – Z. Mykol. 53 (1): 119–136.
Baral, H.O. (1992). Vital versus herbarium taxonomy: morphological differences between living and dead cells of Ascomycetes, and their taxonomic implications. – Mycotaxon 44 (2): 333–390.
Baral, H.O. (2009). Iodine reaction in Ascomycetes: why is Lugol's solution superior to Melzer's reagent? – http://www.in-vivo-veritas.de/articles/iodine-reaction-in-ascomycetes-why-is-lugols-solution-superior-to-melzers-reagent/
Zotto
This overall strategy looks weird, rude and scientifically unsound to me. I would suggest you try to convince the publisher to think again about the requirement for authors to cite previous work, especially when it is relevant and seminal. Not doing so is often perceived as some sort of scientific misconduct.
I would like to add that, as a reviewer (in molecular plant-microbe interactions), I always request authors to cite relevant literature when there is an obvious attempt to hide previous work due to contradiction or anteriority.
Hope that helps.
Best regards,
Edouard