Latest Sci Am Posts and Feedburner Vote

by Jennifer Frazer on July 18, 2011

Yarrrrr . . . there be a By-the-Wind Sailor. Creative Commons Notafly. Click image for license and link.

Hey kiddos, I’ve been busy over at Sci Am and have two new posts up there, in case you missed them:

The Jellyfish that Conquered Land — and Australia

and

Circus of the Spineless #63.5

I have a question for y’alls: would you prefer I switch my old feedburner feed over to the Sci Am feed, so that you don’t have to sign up for a new feed (i.e. my old feed and new feed will give the same content from the new site)? Or would you prefer I keep this feed separate, so you can be updated easily on anything I post here? I don’t anticipate posting here super-often, in case that helps.

Again, my new Sci Am blog is at

blogs.scientificamerican.com/artful-amoeba/

and the new feed is

http://rss.sciam.com/artful-amoeba/feed

{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }

Russ Abbott July 18, 2011 at 5:23 pm

I just added your SciAm feed to my Google reader. Why not just drop this one?

dinahmow July 18, 2011 at 5:35 pm

Oh! Please keep this separate from Sci-Am. I did switch to their feed, but I had way too many coming up in my reader. (Yes, I do keep a science folder, but prefer yours this way.)

But if it suits you better I’ll go with the flow. ;-)

kati July 18, 2011 at 6:04 pm

i agree with dinah… and i love when you also twitter that you just posted at sci-am, too, in case i miss it in the massive flood of sci-am feeds that are coming into my google reader. :)

Daniel Poth July 19, 2011 at 1:11 pm

It makes no great difference to me. I’d say stick with your original thought and keep them separate.

On a side note, the plural of y’all is all y’all.

Jennifer Frazer July 19, 2011 at 3:03 pm

Thanks for the feedback, guys. Just to clear up one thing, you can get a feed of *JUST* my new blog, and not all the other sci am blogs, by using the feed address I gave above ( http://rss.sciam.com/artful-amoeba/feed ) . At least in my feed reader (Google Reader), it’s still me and only me. You don’t have to get subjected to the flood of other Sci Am blogs. If you’d prefer a one-click method for signing up, click on the little button *right next to* the name of my blog at my new site, blogs.scientificamerican.com/artful-amoeba/

But it sounds like the vote is in favor of keeping the old feed separate. So I will!

And in other news, I am elated because they let me keep my original banner and have switched it out over at my new blog! (originally they only let me have the amoeba, not the amoeba with the plans for world domination. Seriously! How can the amoeba be artful without plans for world domination?)

Sally August 5, 2011 at 7:48 am

Jennifer– sorry I missed your great lichen post til ESA tipped me off. Congrats on the move. Here’s a small rub: can’t comment at the new location without signing up as a SciAm member, so it’d be nice to keep something going here if you can (imo).

Thamnolia is a favorite of mine, so strange and hard to find. We have a little at Summit Lake.

A couple small quibbles on the Cladonia: I’d always understood that podetia are the erect cups or uncupped stalks themselves, which sometimes (and in some species never) bear apothecia, the spore part, which reproduce only the fungus. No spores inside the cups, only in the apothecia. No?

I’ll have to add these links to my largely dormant site at Colorado Lichens–thanks for the inspiration! Maybe someday I’ll get that back in motion. Gotta love lichens!

Jennifer Frazer August 5, 2011 at 2:11 pm

Hi Sally! Great to hear from you. I know your blog well. Glad to know you’re reading (and helping keep me in line! : ) )

Trust me, you are not the only person to complain about the commenting issue. I have heard from other readers on this subject. That’s the best I can offer right now, other than to let you know your complaint is definitely shared. I wish the decision was under my control, but it is not. I’ve let the appropriate higher-ups know what you guys think.

So, I looked up your Cladonia question. According to the lichen gods (Brodo and Sharnoffs), you are correct. They are all podetia, but not all podeitia bear apothecia. In the picture I used, only the stacked podetia at top have apothecia. I’ll make a correction. I guess I assumed because pixie cups were cup-shaped, there must be asci in there! Good to learn the truth — thanks.

And yes, how can you not like lichens? Most of the ones I see in the mountains on a daily basis will outlive me — and do it in style. Reminds me of what Yoda said: “When 900 years old you reach, look as good you will not!”

Alan August 10, 2011 at 12:26 am

I like things here. And I wouldn’t put all the eggs in the SciAm basket if freelance writer is still on the goal list. Send them a few articles, maintain ownership of this rising star, and wait for more offers to roll in.

And as an important technical point, the plural of y’all is “all y’all” :)

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: