On the Names of Penaeus setiferus (L.) and Penaeus schmitti Burkenroad

Dr. Gordon Gunter, who sent me the manuscript of his paper “Specific Names of the Atlantic American White Shrimp (Family Penaeidae)” for comment was so kind to allow me to have my reactions to it published simultaneously with it. Unfortunately I cannot agree with Doctor Gunter’s views on the scientific names that should be used for the two Atlantic species of White Shrimp. In the first place I believe that Doctor Gunter’s suggestion that the northern species should be known at Penaeus fluviatilis Say and the southern as P. setiferus (L.) instead of respectively P. setiferus (L.) and P. schmitti Burkenroad, is not in accordance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Second I believe it against the interest of stability and uniformity of nomenclature to switch a well-known name from one economically important species to another, as this will inevitably lead to serious confusion, and will especially cause difficulties to non-taxonomists

On the Names of Penaeus setiferus (L.) and Penaeus schmitti Burkenroad

Dr. Gordon Gunter, who sent me the manuscript of his paper “Specific Names of the Atlantic American White Shrimp (Family Penaeidae)” for comment was so kind to allow me to have my reactions to it published simultaneously with it. Unfortunately I cannot agree with Doctor Gunter’s views on the scientific names that should be used for the two Atlantic species of White Shrimp. In the first place I believe that Doctor Gunter’s suggestion that the northern species should be known at Penaeus fluviatilis Say and the southern as P. setiferus (L.) instead of respectively P. setiferus (L.) and P. schmitti Burkenroad, is not in accordance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Second I believe it against the interest of stability and uniformity of nomenclature to switch a well-known name from one economically important species to another, as this will inevitably lead to serious confusion, and will especially cause difficulties to non-taxonomists

Towards bad history? A call for the use of counterfactual historical reasoning in history education

In this article we argue for the use of Counterfactual Historical Reasoning (CHR) in history education. Within the discipline of History the use of CHR as a reasoning and research strategy is very controversial. However, different studies show the potential of CHR for achieving the important students' competencies of historical and creative thinking. We show this potential using a CHR assignment that teacher students from the University of Groningen developed for secondary school students in their last year of pre-university education. We conclude that CHR could be used in history education to uncover and undermine assumptions, expand imagination, argue and reason from a historical context, ask historical questions and analyse sources in a very effective way

Electrochemistry of potential bioreductive alkylating quinones : Part 2. Electrochemical properties of 2,5-bis(1-aziridinyl)-3,6-bis(ethoxycarbonylamino)-1,4-benzoquinone and some model compounds

The reduction mechanism of 2,5-bis(1-aziridinyl)-3,6-bis(ethoxycarbonylamino)-1,4-benzoquinone (Diaziquone, AZQ) and several model compounds of the mono- and bis(1-aziridinyl)quinone type at the dropping mercury electrode in aqueous solutions was studied. In addition, the influence of methyl substitution of the aziridinyl moiety at the 2-position on the protonation of the aziridine nitrogen was investigated. Substituent effects on quinone reduction and aziridine protonation prior to and following quinone reduction were studied qualitatively

Dutch students’ understanding of the interpretative nature of textbooks when comparing two texts about a significant event in the development of democracy

In history education, the deconstruction of narratives is an important skill for students. The skill teaches them to look critically at the offered texts. In this study, we investigated the extent to which students are able to critically analyse the narratives in their history textbooks. To answer this question, we asked 106 students in pre-university education (16–17 years of age) to read and compare two texts – from two different textbooks – about a turning point in the development of the Dutch state and democracy: the introduction of universal suffrage for men and women in 1917–19. One group of students (N=10) worked on the assignment while thinking aloud. We found that most students recognized the author’s voice in the selection of persons and dates and in the attention paid to a particular topic, but that they hardly mentioned recognizing the voice in aspects such as the choice of words or headings. The students who analysed and compared the texts while thinking aloud all indicated after the assignment that they understood that these texts are different interpretations of the same historical development