Zoological sources & links

[theropod]

Post good places to find papers or other reliable source material here! You can also post a short description of what you think a site is good for or not so good for.

The Theropod Database: archosaur.us/theropoddatabase/
Palaeobiology Database: paleodb.org/cgi-bin/bridge.pl

Sauropod vertebrate picture of the week: svpow.wordpress.com/
Archosaur Musings: archosaurmusings.wordpress.com/
The skeletal drawing-Blog: skeletaldrawing.blogspot.co.at/
Mark Witton’s Blog: markwitton-com.blogspot.co.at
Palaeoblog: palaeoblog.blogspot.com/
Oceans of Kansas: www.oceansofkansas.com/
Website of Greg Paul: gspauldino.com/
Plesiosauria: www.plesiosauria.com/
Plesiosaur (and no, its not the same site): www.plesiosaur.com

PLOS: www.plosone.org/
Paleo electronica: palaeo-electronica.org/
Acta palaeontologica polonica: www.app.pan.pl/home.html
PeerJ: peerj.com/
JSTOR (login with the name "University" and the password "Trojans" ): www.jstor.org/
:::::::EDIT: this doesn't seem to work anymore
iusd.libguides.com/content.php?pid=164633&sid=1389704


not always reliable but still worth a look:
Askabiologist: www.askabiologist.org.uk
Dinosaur Mailing List: dml.cmnh.org/
Palaeos: www.palaeos.com/
DinoData: www.dinodata.org/
Palaeocritti: www.palaeocritti.com/home
Eurypterids: www.eurypterids.co.uk/index.htm


To ask others for papers they might have, please use this thread (link). For recommending papers, post here!

[creature386]

www.researchgate.net/
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
www.miketaylor.org.uk/
www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/

[theropod]

I just wanted to share this rather pretty damn extremely amazing youtube channel:

www.youtube.com/user/UCBerkeley/videos?flow=grid&view=1

see for yourself...

[coherentsheaf]

Exalt for theropod. This a good basic compilation.

I would however claim that for our purposes askabiologist is rarely well researched enough in their responses as to be of any use. While the people running it are experts in their respective fields their specific answers often do not cite credible sources or any sources at that and answers to somewhat harder questions are rarely answered or answered incorrectly. Examples:

www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers/viewtopic.php?id=7721 is absolute nonsense -mass is still an extremely important predictor of metabolic rate and ecological position.

Similarily www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers/viewtopic.php?id=9736 - Large-brained reptiles like the genus corvus are similar to most mammalian top performers with exclusion of humans.

[theropod]

Well, it's a good resource to ask basic questions and get an expert opinion on the subject. It is true, surprisingly often no-one knows an answer (happened with two of the four admittedly pretty specific questions I asked there). Of course the page is mainly for young people and the answers are usually accordingly (un)scientific.
Many sources are not always 100% sourced and reliable, still they can be useful.

[coherentsheaf]

If you want to get a basic understanding, even for young people, wikipedia is a far better place - it outsources askabiologist in almost every category.

[stomatopod]

Coherentsheaf,
it depends on the topic and the country you live in(well if you use the English version then the basics should be right, if you want more specific information then often there is outdated or information.

I do not want to get deeper into the problems of wiki, but one should always be cautious and look if the article is well sourced or not.

[Grey]

Depending the article and the language version.
English is often the best and the most referenced but some specific articles can sporadically be better in others languages, though rarely zoological ones.

On askabiologist, it depends also who respond to you, sometimes the responses come from non-specialists inherent to your question. Some responses I ve of Manubu Sakamoto were very pertinent.

[Grey]

Depending the article and the language version.
English is often the best and the most referenced but some specific articles can sporadically be better in others languages, though rarely zoological ones.

On askabiologist, it depends also who respond to you, sometimes the responses come from non-specialists inherent to your question. Some responses I ve seen of Manubu Sakamoto were very pertinent.

[coherentsheaf]

Apr 19, 2013 9:51:33 GMT 5 stomatopod said:

Coherentsheaf,
it depends on the topic and the country you live in(well if you use the English version then the basics should be right, if you want more specific information then often there is outdated or information.

I do not want to get deeper into the problems of wiki, but one should always be cautious and look if the article is well sourced or not.

Sure. My claim merely was that the english wiki beats askabiologist, which is not all that surprising since the editorial staff is so much bigger. Both are not sources I would use to prove a point in a discussion.

Also consider that askabiolgist comes with a sense of authority wikipedia does not have, causing people to believe nonsense on it more readily, whie wikipedia gives people the very natural feeling that all knowledge is provisional, depeding on further revision.

[creature386]

This is very good for people interessted in sharks:
www.fao.org/docrep/009/x9293e/x9293e00.htm

[coherentsheaf]

The by far most important site to find information is google scholar:

scholar.google.at/

Some very informative blogs include:

whatsinjohnsfreezer.com/
blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/
blogs.scientificamerican.com/running-ponies/

[Life]

Great thread; Stick worthy.

[theropod]

The Bite Stuff: qilong.wordpress.com/
Adam Yates' blog: dracovenator.wordpress.com/
Mesozoic Vertebrates: mesozoic-vertebrates.blogspot.co.uk/
Open Source Paleontologist: openpaleo.blogspot.com/

[creature386]

Richard Bulter's resarch group:
www.archosauromorpha.com/