[Comment on “Auroral green line” by Shröder, and “The interpretation of the auroral green line” by Hendriksen and Egeland]



While I agree with the point made by Shröder (Eos, April 18, 1989) that early work in a subject is generally ignored, and that this is unfortunate, I feel that his implied criticism of the paper by Hendriksen and Egeland (Eos, July 19, 1988) is misplaced and unwarranted.

Hendriksen and Egeland were not writing a definitive review paper in which all contributions to a subject were to be mentioned and/or discussed. They were writing from a particular perspective, emphasizing only those aspects they considered pertinent to their treatment. Other writers, with differing perspectives, would have selected from the literature differently. As will be noted below in more detail, Schroder himself has done just this, in selecting only German work in his comment.