« Focus on natural products in Nature Chem Bio | Main | Starting an online conversation about your paper »

Bookmark in Connotea

Will Darwin Centre be big enough?

From this week's issue of Nature, Correspondence page (Nature 447, 908; 2007).

Your News story 'Anger at "unfit" museum design' (Nature 447, 239; 2007) reports some people's belief that the design of the Natural History Museum's Darwin Centre Phase Two is unfit for purpose, as the building will not have room to house the entire insect and plant collection.
The crux of the issue is that the public is being given access to our science, and this takes space. Building new facilities for the entirety of our collections, research and public access in one go is not feasible, with current funding. Instead we are taking it by stages. With the completion of Darwin Centre Phase Two, we will have more than half of our 70 million specimens in high-quality storage.
Balancing the needs of collections, research and public access will help us to advance knowledge of the natural world and to communicate this to the public. It will mean some changes in how we work and it will take time to adjust. However, we think that the new building will lead to a long-term improvement in the way we carry out and communicate the museum's work in taxonomy and systematics.
We have received a high level of support for this project, and are confident that it will be a real benefit to the museum, the scientific community and the wider public.
Richard Lane
Natural History Museum, London.

See here for the News story on which Dr Lane's letter comments, which reports criticisms of the directors of the Natural History Museum over their plans to split parts of its world-renowned collection of biological specimens on a permanent basis. Some of the museum's curators are angry that plans for a new building to store the bulk of the museum's entomology and botany collections remain unaltered three years after being branded unfit for the purpose by museum staff, according to the News story.


Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by the blog editors before being published, mainly to ensure that spam and irrelevant material (such as product advertisements) are not published . Please keep your comment brief. Excessively long or offensively phrased entries will be edited. Remember this blog is for feedback and discussion of matters concerning scientific authorship or peer-review - not for drawing attention to your research.

If you want to know if a NPG journal would be interested in your research, you will need to contact the journal's editorial office, which can be done via the authors & referees website.

We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. E-mail addresses are required in case we need to discuss your comment with you directly. We won't publish your e-mail address unless you request it.

Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to avoid spam. If you are having trouble with this system, you can send your comment by e-mail to 'authors at nature dot com'.

please enter code