This article was downloaded by: [University of Saskatchewan Library] On: 06 January 2015, At: 05:30 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
New Zealand Veterinary Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzv20
Unwarranted publications? K.L. Macmillan
a
a
11 McCracken Ave., Hamilton Published online: 23 Feb 2011.
To cite this article: K.L. Macmillan (1977) Unwarranted publications?, New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 25:11, 355-355, DOI: 10.1080/00480169.1977.34454 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00480169.1977.34454
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
1977
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 05:30 06 January 2015
IIIWARIIAITEII PIIBUCATIOIIS?
Sir: - As a co-author of a paper criticised by Webster in his letter-to-the-editor (N.Z. Vet. J. 25:) I would support your decision to publish the paper "Aspects of Reproduction in N.Z. Dairy Herds. 1. Gestation Le~gth" (N.Z. Vet. J. 24: 243-252) in this Journal. Your critic seems over-awed by the use of large numbers of breeding records which he concludes were subjected to "elaborate statistical analysis" involving "inevitable wear and tear on expensive calculating machines." When Webster was active on the N.Z. Council 25 years ago when the Journal was founded, extensive field surveys may have required "a large expenditure of highly paid labour" and prolonged machine calculations. But computers were used in this study, and their use is important in modern-day A.B. programmes where fewer and fewer sires are used with increasing number of cows. Such extensive sire usage in terms of increased production must be monitored in terms of associated, but unexpected, changes in other parameters which may also be inherited. The fact Webster was taught "asa student nearly 40 years ago" that pregnancy was about 280 days, (Webster taught me the same thing 20 years ago) was not a major point in the paper to which he referred. With research work continuing in the fields of exotic-sire usage, induced parturition and oestrus synchronisation, the definition of the range of 'normal' gestations and the factors which influence the variation (including errors in recording) are important to the subsequent analyses. The numerous requests from at least 12 foreign countries for reprints of this paper indicate that our work and the results were of considerable interest to others. Such interest should at least maintain the Journal's reputation. It is inferred that the 'Publish or Perish syndrome' partly motivated the project and the preparation of the paper. Again things may have changed in the last 25 years. This particular paper was re-written twice before an initial typing, then re-typed and sent to five people for comments. Their recommendations were discussed and incorporated before a final typing and proofing. You, as Editor, may have subsequently submitted it to sub-editors or referees - particularly if there was any doubt about its merits. Preparing scientific papers for publication is an onerous task. Perish the thought that any scientist should be solely motivated to publish for his own selfish agrandisement! Suggesting the Editor is party to the maintenance of such a syndrome is unjustified use of an inappr()priate cliche. I would endorse Websters congratulatory remarks on your Leader entitled "Communication". A greater number of "Clinical Communications" is most desirable. But if the quest for balance (?) results in fewer scientific papers being published, then the result may mean less communication. Scientific papers need not be published in N .Z. Veterinary Journal. Instead, they would be published elsewhere - in local and overseas journals. University staff and scientists .would still have access to them through institutional libraries. The practitioner would be the one to suffer through any policy of 'restricted communication'. This is the quandary faced by any association which largely relies on members' subscriptions to meet the rising costs of journal publication. Since the communication of results is an essential part of effective research, should not some of the costs of publication be met by the scientific organisations which undertook the research? This is an important question which has indirectly arisen from the continuing interest by Webster in the N.Z. Veterinary Journal- an interest which was sufficient to provoke the writing of a letter-to-the-editor. K. L. Macmillan. J1 McCracken Ave., Hamilton.
10th October 1977
355
New Zealand Veterinary Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tnzv20
Unwarranted publications? K.L. Macmillan
a
a
11 McCracken Ave., Hamilton Published online: 23 Feb 2011.
To cite this article: K.L. Macmillan (1977) Unwarranted publications?, New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 25:11, 355-355, DOI: 10.1080/00480169.1977.34454 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00480169.1977.34454
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
1977
NEW ZEALAND VETERINARY JOURNAL
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 05:30 06 January 2015
IIIWARIIAITEII PIIBUCATIOIIS?
Sir: - As a co-author of a paper criticised by Webster in his letter-to-the-editor (N.Z. Vet. J. 25:) I would support your decision to publish the paper "Aspects of Reproduction in N.Z. Dairy Herds. 1. Gestation Le~gth" (N.Z. Vet. J. 24: 243-252) in this Journal. Your critic seems over-awed by the use of large numbers of breeding records which he concludes were subjected to "elaborate statistical analysis" involving "inevitable wear and tear on expensive calculating machines." When Webster was active on the N.Z. Council 25 years ago when the Journal was founded, extensive field surveys may have required "a large expenditure of highly paid labour" and prolonged machine calculations. But computers were used in this study, and their use is important in modern-day A.B. programmes where fewer and fewer sires are used with increasing number of cows. Such extensive sire usage in terms of increased production must be monitored in terms of associated, but unexpected, changes in other parameters which may also be inherited. The fact Webster was taught "asa student nearly 40 years ago" that pregnancy was about 280 days, (Webster taught me the same thing 20 years ago) was not a major point in the paper to which he referred. With research work continuing in the fields of exotic-sire usage, induced parturition and oestrus synchronisation, the definition of the range of 'normal' gestations and the factors which influence the variation (including errors in recording) are important to the subsequent analyses. The numerous requests from at least 12 foreign countries for reprints of this paper indicate that our work and the results were of considerable interest to others. Such interest should at least maintain the Journal's reputation. It is inferred that the 'Publish or Perish syndrome' partly motivated the project and the preparation of the paper. Again things may have changed in the last 25 years. This particular paper was re-written twice before an initial typing, then re-typed and sent to five people for comments. Their recommendations were discussed and incorporated before a final typing and proofing. You, as Editor, may have subsequently submitted it to sub-editors or referees - particularly if there was any doubt about its merits. Preparing scientific papers for publication is an onerous task. Perish the thought that any scientist should be solely motivated to publish for his own selfish agrandisement! Suggesting the Editor is party to the maintenance of such a syndrome is unjustified use of an inappr()priate cliche. I would endorse Websters congratulatory remarks on your Leader entitled "Communication". A greater number of "Clinical Communications" is most desirable. But if the quest for balance (?) results in fewer scientific papers being published, then the result may mean less communication. Scientific papers need not be published in N .Z. Veterinary Journal. Instead, they would be published elsewhere - in local and overseas journals. University staff and scientists .would still have access to them through institutional libraries. The practitioner would be the one to suffer through any policy of 'restricted communication'. This is the quandary faced by any association which largely relies on members' subscriptions to meet the rising costs of journal publication. Since the communication of results is an essential part of effective research, should not some of the costs of publication be met by the scientific organisations which undertook the research? This is an important question which has indirectly arisen from the continuing interest by Webster in the N.Z. Veterinary Journal- an interest which was sufficient to provoke the writing of a letter-to-the-editor. K. L. Macmillan. J1 McCracken Ave., Hamilton.
10th October 1977
355
