| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Vitali |
Posted - 13/03/2013 : 10:22:59
It was much spoken here about the quality of Breuning’s descriptions. I am presenting an example of the quality of publications now. This is a starting part of the key in the revision of Obereopsis.
Look at the branching between 2 and 2 in the first two lines, look at the dead loop between 3, 4, and 5 (both the thesis and anti-thesis of 2 merge at 5). Has anybody already solved this puzzle? How many of that kind mistakes does this table contain? Is it possible to use this table for identification of 133 species, if there is a complete mess already in the first 10 lines? A clownade 
30.26 KB |
| 3 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Francesco |
Posted - 11/02/2015 : 14:50:50
Another:
150. Prosternum noir ou brun foncé ... 151
-- Prosternum jaune rougeâtre... 110 170 |
| Vitali |
Posted - 11/02/2015 : 13:15:22
Thank you a lot, Francesco. Keep looking for other missing sevens. |
| Francesco |
Posted - 11/02/2015 : 13:02:16
I have finally received the key to this genus (thank you Xavier! ).
The second 2 must be replaced with 72
The first 5 must be replaced with 57.
I am looking for further errors. |
