This editorial is aimed at explaining why the editors of Hydrobiologia are so concerned with biological nomenclature and why we ask our authors the utmost precision when referring to species in their papers. In particular, the Instructions for Authors of the journal specify that “When a species name is used for the first time in an article, it should be stated in full, and the name of its describer should also be given” (https://www.springer.com/journal/10750/submission-guidelines?IFA#Instructions%20for%20Authors_Scientific%20style). In the next lines, we want to show that this is not just an old fashion formalism, but a necessity to correctly and univocally identify the biological subjects that are the basis of the research published in this journal. Moreover, Hydrobiologia is a generalist journal giving voice to research embedded in a wide ecological and evolutionary context, carried out in any kind of aquatic ecosystem, and considering all their biological entities from small viruses onwards to large whales! Thus, the work of a, for example, fish biologist, should be readable for a botanist and vice versa. This achievement can be reached by avoiding as much as possible the jargon typical of each discipline (as the so called “common names” can be considered) and allowing the unequivocal identification of the targeted biological entities.
Located in
Library
/
RBINS Staff Publications 2022
Socio-economic organisation, subsistence strategies and environmental exploitation still remain largely open questions for the Late Chalcolithic period (ca. 4500–3500 BC) in southern Caucasus even though they are of prime importance for understanding the development of post-Neolithic societies in these semi-arid and mountainous areas. Interdisciplinary bioarchaeological research can, however, provide valuable new insights into these issues. In the Late Chalcolithic occupation layers at Ovçular Tepesi (Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Azerbaijan), the fills of pits, composed mainly of domestic refuse, proved to contain the richest and most diverse assemblages of biological remains at the site. These remains, retrieved by the use of flotation and sieving techniques, therefore constitute ideal assemblages for understanding subsistence strategies and the exploitation of natural resources. It is shown here that the agricultural economy at Late Chalcolithic Ovçular Tepesi was based mainly on the cultivation of cereals and pulses and the herding of sheep and goat. The river and its surroundings provided wood fuel and fish. The results of the bioarchaeological study further suggest that the Late Chalcolithic village was occupied permanently as shown by the development of commensal populations of small mammals.
Located in
Library
/
RBINS Staff Publications
