WWW.WAS.ORG • WORLD AQUACULTURE • JUNE 2017 11 What are we losing? Over the past few years I have lost several good friends and outstanding scientists in the global arena and along with them, the world has lost not only their continued input of wisdom and vision but now their accumulated libraries are being thrown into dumpsters with nary a twinge of conscience! Why? Because no one seems to recognize the importance and significance of historic documents, hard-to-obtain publications, or perhaps most salient — the need to know what has been done previously and by whom. This isn’t a new problem but it is a rapidly escalating one. Over 30 years ago, as I took up a new position, I noted box after box of books and reprints being tossed into the dumpster outside my office window. When I checked, I realized that they were from two individuals who had amassed very impressive libraries during their accumulated 70+ years of research. When I inquired they told me that they were retiring and no longer needed the material — without a thought that the material might be valuable to the library or other individuals or future researchers. I was appalled, but also thrilled — dumpster diving it was — and I just about tripled my own library resources. I not only used that material for my own efforts over the years but my library quickly became known to others as a useful and accessible source of references. Over the ensuing decades, I have been able to provide colleagues in many arenas with those hard-to-locate papers, books, proceedings, and other materials. Scientific research should build on prior knowledge, yet more and more of the published literature is nothing but a rehash of old studies, or worse, complete repeats of prior studies, and all because the authors either couldn’t be bothered to look at the historical literature or didn’t know how to carry out a proper literature survey. Only two years ago I received a paper for consideration and realized that it was almost an exact copy of a prior study done in 1958. Did I think the authors had plagiarized the effort? No. I assumed — correctly as it turned out — that they simply had not done their due diligence. The paper was rejected, but sadly that represented almost two years of a student’s efforts, the funds to pay them, and it resulted in an unpublishable effort that could so easily have been avoided had they taken the time to do some reading. Their time could then have been spent moving that prior study forward. Not only is this practice an affront to those who have gone before, it is a waste of time, effort, and precious research funds — and it is becoming all too commonplace. As an editor for the past 30+ years, I have seen far too often the results of poor literature research, knowledge, and understanding. Authors now routinely cite what I refer to as ‘references of convenience’, i.e. any old paper that they happen to have on hand that cited one or two other irrelevant or even incompetent papers rather than the key references — or even pertinent references — to the statement made. Why? Because their computer or telephone search didn’t provide them with the most important works. Because they don’t know how to differentiate good studies from others. Or because they couldn’t be bothered going to the library to actually look at the documents and browse other materials or investigate older reference lists to locate the original works. Or because they never actually obtained and read the papers in question, just added them to the reference list. It may be surprising to some that papers from the early days (meaning a century or more ago, not 10 years!) contain highly relevant observations and insights, not to mention the issue of giving credit where it is due. I have raised my concerns with librarians and asked for guidance about where one might deposit long runs of scientific journals, large collections of invaluable offprints, and books. It seems there is no accessible graveyard for these materials and much of the material is put in the trash. Most recently I was told by one librarian that “they liken it to the Nazi book burning in the 1930’s” and to “reinventing the wheel over and over again, as all the old research gets lost.” What should be done? What can be done? Students should be trained to carry out a comprehensive literature review and required to do so before they embark on any research effort. That means libraries and reference lists and resources beyond their tablet and telephone screens. Scientists and advisors should do the same and pass along that guidance and influence to their students. Granting agencies should engage more reviewers who know the literature and can identify duplication of effort before it is funded for the second and third time. Overall, there needs to be a concerted effort to instill in students and researchers the appreciation that scientific literature is an important historical entity and needs to be used and preserved. Scientific research and scholarship are accumulated over time and the new era of ‘rush to publication’ to enhance personal statistics and feed publishers’ greed has severely hampered, if not squashed, the basic quest for knowledge and understanding and scholarship. The value of prior knowledge needs to be preserved and that can only happen if scientists acknowledge that value and pass that sentiment on to ensuing generations. As I sit here perusing my hard-won collection of over 100,000 offprints and 150 linear feet of books I can only hope that it isn’t dumpster bound. Notes Sandra E. Shumway, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut. This article is also being published in the newsletters of the National Shellfisheries Association and the American Malacalogical Society. In Defense of Scholarly Publications — Looking Back Before Lurching Forward Sandra E. Shumway Scientific research should build on prior knowledge, yet more and more of the published literature is nothing but a rehash of old studies, or worse, complete repeats of prior studies, and all because the authors either couldn’t be bothered to look at the historical literature or didn’t know how to carry out a proper literature survey.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjExNDY=