MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2095859619 · doi:10.1093/aob/mcu090

Raven biology of plants, 8th edn

2014· article· en· W2095859619 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nigel Chaffey

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnnals of Botany · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiquePlant Parasitism and Resistance
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBiologyGlossaryReading (process)Listing (finance)Library scienceClassicsBotanyComputer scienceLinguisticsHistoryPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

I first discovered Raven et al.'s Biology of plants (hereafter referred to as BoP) in its 6th edition, published in 1999, when designing a second-year undergraduate ‘botany’ course. Whether it was because this was the first book I'd secured as a free ‘Instructor evaluation copy’ of a textbook (one of the few ‘perks’ of being a university lecturer … ), I can't be sure, but it's been a constant companion, and on my recommended reading list for my plant biology courses (with suitable updating to 2005's 7th edition), ever since. Why? Because it was – and still is! – a great, all-purpose, general plant biology (botany in all but name) text, which includes abundant coloured diagrams, photos and photomicrographs, a substantial glossary (26 two-columned pages), a comprehensive index (64 three-columned pages!), suggestions of further reading (many of which are dated post-2005 as befits this ‘most significant revision in its history’) by chapter, a highly readable – therefore pedagogic? – style, and covers all the basics, from evolution, taxonomic overview of Kingdom Plantae (plus bacteria, archaea, viruses, fungi and algae), ultrastructure, anatomy, physiology and biochemistry, ecology (although those latter two chapters are now only available online), and even plant–people relationships (both as a separate 22-page chapter and as 15 short essays throughout the book's approx. 900 pages). Along with the extensive updating, Peter Raven's name has disappeared from the listing of authors. It is not clear to me why this has happened, but this 8th edition is dedicated to the much-lauded gentleman (a Time magazine ‘Hero for the Planet’; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_H._Raven) and who is now honoured in BoP's updated title, Raven Biology of Plants. And BoP retains its distinctive impressionistic cover – van Gogh's 1890 ‘Field of Poppies’ this time – which makes it stand out from the other books on the shelf! Does such a wonderful book have any competitors? Yes, there is a big, competitive market for undergraduate textbooks and plant biology is no exception. However, the textbook closest in style and coverage to BoP – that I know of – is the approx. 700-page tome Mauseth's Botany (2014), now in its 5th edition. I like ‘Mauseth’ (and it's not just because it's entitled botany!), but tend to turn to BoP first and supplement information from that source with material from other texts – such as Mauseth's. And you will need to supplement BoP with other sources. If you want more on the plant physiology side of things, then you will probably need the likes of specialist texts such as Taiz and Zeiger (2010). If you are after more of the molecular biology dimension, then Smith et al. (2010) or Jones et al. (2013) will help. To delve deeper into the structural–developmental side of plants, texts like Beck (2010) will be needed. For more on those all-important plants-and-people aspects of botany, then invaluable are Levetin and McMahon (2012) and Mauseth (2013), etc. The point is not that you don't need any other text than BoP, because you do!, but BoP is an excellent starting point for the basics of plant biology. Simply ‘mix-and-match’ BoP with your favourite, more specialist other texts to get the desired final outcome as suits your particular audience. So, in concluison, I don't think you can beat Raven Biology of Plants as a great all-round, comprehensive introduction to botany (oh, alright then! plant biology). An aside: the above comments refer to the so-called International Edition – ‘for use outside the USA and Canada’ – of BoP, 8th edition. I've often wondered what may be different in this edition compared to the USA one, and scrutinising Amazon's UK site I think I may have found the answer. The non-International Edition is shown retailing at about £120, but a reviewer (http://amzn.to/1jxOoOa) says that both editions have the same content. So, maybe the International Edition should be renamed the ‘Austerity’ Edition. In any event, it is nice to know that the Americans are helping out the cash-strapped botany students of Europe and non-USA/Canada!

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,776
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,127

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,036
Tête enseignante GPT0,267
Écart entre enseignants0,230 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations31
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnnals of BotanyMême sujetPlant Parasitism and ResistanceTravaux en français237 207