> Actually many articles in ABJ are subjected by Joe for peer review.

Yes, but the definition of "peer review" is one where the "peers" are
people currently working and publishing scientific papers in science
journals of record in the specific area of research addressed by the paper
submitted.  ABJ simply does not have a large enough pool of people who meet
this criteria to be able to claim that they are "peer reviewed" in anywhere
near the same way as the legitimate science journals one finds in citations
to real papers.

The difference is that between a single pistachio and an entire truckload
of macadamias - not nearly enough nuts, and nowhere nearly expensive enough.  :)

That said, one can find the occasional citation to an ABJ article
in real science papers, further confusing the question of ABJ's
status, but ABJ is not indexed in the massive citation indexes,
and if your articles ain't indexed, you ain't publishing "science".

But even the indexes are not perfect.  Kim Flottum informed me
this summer that "Apicultural Abstracts", the journal put out by the
International Bee Research Association (supposed to list "every important
research paper on bees and beekeeping in the entire world") abstracted an
article I wrote for Bee Culture on "Sweeteners":
http://www.beeculture.com/beeculture/SugarReprint.pdf

To compound the error, he said that they also plan on abstracting the
article I wrote for him about the impact of Global Warming on beekeeping.
Neither article had any pretensions about being scientific papers, as
both were mere magazine articles written for an readership of beekeepers.

Go figure.


           jim (My Wife: "...C'est la vie..."
                Me:       " Ok... 'La Vie!' ")

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::