<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Online Laboratory of Kevin Zelnio &#187; DNA Barcode</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.zelnio.org/tag/dna-barcode/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.zelnio.org</link>
	<description>Deep Sea Biology &#124; Systematics &#38; Taxonomy &#124; Science Writing &#124; Music</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 04:23:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Patenting Systematics Revisited</title>
		<link>http://www.zelnio.org/2009/08/14/patenting-systematics-revisited/</link>
		<comments>http://www.zelnio.org/2009/08/14/patenting-systematics-revisited/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:13:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Zelnio</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Systematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CoBL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA Barcode]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LinkedIn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Molecular Biology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NCBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Hebert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phylogenetics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.zelnio.org/?p=116</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Alex, an entomologist at the fabulous Myrmecos blog, was also infuriated by the news piece by Pennisi (subscription required) in the latest issue of Science. His take was slightly different than my take on it a couple days ago. Alex is most upset about the pending Microsoft patent claim on, according to the language of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.zelnio.org/2009/08/14/patenting-systematics-revisited/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patenting Systematics</title>
		<link>http://www.zelnio.org/2009/08/08/patenting-systematics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.zelnio.org/2009/08/08/patenting-systematics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2009 13:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Zelnio</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Systematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBOL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA Barcode]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elizabeth Pennisi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LinkedIn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phylogenetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PNAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxonomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.zelnio.org/?p=96</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>An interesting news piece came out today in the most recent issue of Science. Elizabeth Pennisi reports that systematists are up in arms over pending patents on methods that have been in place for dozens of years. Such as a novel </p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230; way to use biological data that has been organized according to evolutionary relatedness. It [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.zelnio.org/2009/08/08/patenting-systematics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
