Re: growth of the discipline

[John Alroy <jack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Una notes that there may be a shift among paleobotanists towards  
publishing more on modern taxa. I want to point out that the  
statistical results on the paleomammalogy literature aren't  
influenced by this effect. Vertebrate paleontologists have  
traditionally published much or even most of their work in serials  
that are not strictly paleontological, e.g., American Journal of  
Science, Bulletin of the American Museum, Journal of Mammalogy, or  
any number of "in house" university/museum serials such as Breviora  
or Contributions in Science (LA Co Museum). All such literature was  
included in my mini-study. The point is that the literature database  
is a good measure of activity in the field, regardless of how many  
scientists would want to call themselves paleomammalogists (or  
mammalian paleontologists). If there are more paleontologists but  
they do less work, that doesn't necessarily mean the field is doing  
well.