Dear Jane, Jim and All; I am no great lover of spreadsheets and databases but I wanted to explain my point. As a bibliography to a book I like very much the author title format. But as a stand alone piece what good is it? If you are just interested in authors it is great, but most of us want some information about a particular bulb species. If one looks at most scientific journals today, they have at the beginning of each article a list of keywords. If one placed these three or four words in searchable fields, then one could still present the author title information but have a way of searching the data for special topics. This works for short papers. But what about Floras and the like. You would have to have a field for every species listed to be of value. Of course that would be great. I can imagine how nice it would be if one could enter a species name and bring up all the literature that related to that species. Unfortunately that would be a huge task. But as I explained before a simple list of authors-date-titles would soon get out of hand and be of little value. I can provide such a list of over a thousand works relating to Iris but of what value is it. As it stands as part of the Encyclopedia of Iris it notes where information in that work comes from. But using it to work backwards would not be very productive unless one wanted to repeat the ten years of research I have just completed,