Taxonomy based on science is necessary for global conservation
Thomson, S. A., Pyle, R. L., Ahyong, S. T., Alonso-Zarazaga, M., Ammirati, J., Araya, J. F., Ascher, J. S., Audisio, T. L., Azevedo-Santos, V. M., Bailly, N., Baker, W. J., Balke, M., Barclay, M. V. L., Barrett, R. L., Benine, R. C., Bickerstaff, J. R. M., Bouchard, P., Bour, R., Bourgoin, T., Boyko, C. B. et al, Breure, A. S. H., Brothers, D. J., Byng, J. W., Campbell, D., Ceríaco, L. M. P., Cernák, I., Cerretti, P., Chang, C.-H., Cho, S., Copus, J. M., Costello, M. J., Cseh, A., Csuzdi, C., Culham, A.  ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7440-0133, D'Elía, G., d'Udekem d'Acoz, C., Daneliya, M. E., Dekker, R., Dickinson, E. C., Dickinson, T. A., van Dijk, P. P., Dijkstra, K.-D. B., Dima, B., Dmitriev, D. A., Duistermaat, L., Dumbacher, J. P., Eiserhardt, W. L., Ekrem, T., Evenhuis, N. L., Faille, A., Fernández-Triana, J. L., Fiesler, E., Fishbein, M., Fordham, B. G., Freitas, A. V. L., Friol, N. R., Fritz, U., Frøslev, T., Funk, V. A., Gaimari, S. D., Garbino, G. S. T., Garraffoni, A. R. S., Geml, J., Gill, A. C., Gray, A., Grazziotin, F. G., Greenslade, P., Gutiérrez, E. E., Harvey, M. S., Hazevoet, C. J., He, K., He, X., Helfer, S., Helgen, K. M., van Heteren, A. H., Hita Garcia, F., Holstein, N., Horváth, M. K., Hovenkamp, P. H., Hwang, W. S., Hyvönen, J., Islam, M. B., Iverson, J. B., Ivie, M. A., Jaafar, Z., Jackson, M. D., Jayat, J. P., Johnson, N. F., Kaiser, H., Klitgård, B. B., Knapp, D. G., Kojima, J.-I., Kõljalg, U., Kontschán, J., Krell, F.-T., Krisai-Greilhuber, I., Kullander, S., Latella, L., Lattke, J. E., Lencioni, V., Lewis, G. P., Lhano, M. G., Lujan, N. K., Luksenburg, J. A., Mariaux, J., Marinho-Filho, J., Marshall, C. J., Mate, J. F., McDonough, M. M., Michel, E., Miranda, V. F. O., Mitroiu, M.-D., Molinari, J., Monks, S., Moore, A. J., Moratelli, R., Murányi, D., Nakano, T., Nikolaeva, S., Noyes, J., Ohl, M., Oleas, N. H., Orrell, T., Páll-Gergely, B., Pape, T., Papp, V., Parenti, L. R., Patterson, D., Pavlinov, I. Y., Pine, R. H., Poczai, P., Prado, J., Prathapan, D., Rabeler, R. K., Randall, J. E., Rheindt, F. E., Rhodin, A. G. J., Rodríguez, S. M., Rogers, D. C., Roque, F. d. O., Rowe, K. C., Ruedas, L. A., Salazar-Bravo, J., Salvador, R. B., Sangster, G., Sarmiento, C. E., Schigel, D. S., Schmidt, S., Schueler, F. W., Segers, H., Snow, N., Souza-Dias, P. G. B., Stals, R., Stenroos, S., Stone, R. D., Sturm, C. F., Štys, P., Teta, P., Thomas, D. C., Timm, R. M., Tindall, B. J., Todd, J. A., Triebel, D., Valdecasas, A. G., Vizzini, A., Vorontsova, M. S., de Vos, J. M., Wagner, P., Watling, L., Weakley, A., Welter-Schultes, F., Whitmore, D., Wilding, N., Will, K., Williams, J., Wilson, K., Winston, J. E., Wüster, W., Yanega, D., Yeates, D. K., Zaher, H., Zhang, G., Zhang, Z.-Q. and Zhou, H.-Z.
(2018)
Taxonomy based on science is necessary for global conservation.
PLoS biology, 16 (3).
e2005075.
ISSN 1545-7885
It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing. To link to this item DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005075 Abstract/SummaryTaxonomy is a scientific discipline that has provided the universal naming and classification system of biodiversity for centuries and continues effectively to accommodate new knowledge. A recent publication by Garnett and Christidis [1] expressed concerns regarding the difficulty that taxonomic changes represent for conservation efforts and proposed the establishment of a system to govern taxonomic changes. Their proposal to “restrict the freedom of taxonomic action” through governing subcommittees that would “review taxonomic papers for compliance” and their assertion that “the scientific community’s failure to govern taxonomy threatens the effectiveness of global efforts to halt biodiversity loss, damages the credibility of science, and is expensive to society” are flawed in many respects. They also assert that the lack of governance of taxonomy damages conservation efforts, harms the credibility of science, and is costly to society. Despite its fairly recent release, Garnett and Christidis' proposition has already been rejected by a number of colleagues [2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. Herein, we contribute to the conversation between taxonomists and conservation biologists aiming to clarify some misunderstandings and issues in the proposition by Garnett and Christidis.
Downloads per month over past year
| Date Deposited: | 27 Mar 2018 09:02 | Date item deposited into CentAUR |
|---|
| Last Modified: | 16 Dec 2024 02:31 | Date item last modified |
|---|
1. Garnett ST, Christidis L. Taxonomy anarchy hampers conservation. Nature. 2017;546(7656):25–27. pmid:28569833
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
2. Raposo MA, Stopiglia R, Brito GRR, Bockmann FA, Kirwan GM, Gayon J, Dubois A. What really hampers taxonomy and conservation? A riposte to Garnett and Christidis (2017). Zootaxa, 2017;4317(1), pp.179–184.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
3. Holstein N. and Luebert F., 2017. Taxonomy: stable taxon boundaries. Nature, 548(7666), pp.158–158.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
4. Cotterill FP., Groves CP., Taylor PJ., 2017. Taxonomy: refine rather than stabilize. Nature, 547(7662), pp.162–162.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
5. Jackson MD, Scherz MD, Zona S. 2017. Taxonomy is not beholden to its dependencies: a rebuttal to Garnett and Christidis (2017) PeerJ Preprints 5:e3060v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3060v1
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
6. Hollingsworth PM, 2017. Taxonomy: avoid extra bureaucracy. Nature, 546(7660), pp.600–600.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
7. Lambertz M., 2017. Taxonomy: retain scientific autonomy. Nature, 546(7660), pp.600–600.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
8. Funk VA, Herendeen P, Knapp S., 2017. Taxonomy: naming algae, fungi, plants. Nature, 546(7660), pp.599–599.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
9. Hey J, Waples RS, Arnold ML, Butlin RK, Harrison RG. Understanding and confronting species uncertainty in biology and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol. 2003;18(11):597–603.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
10. Thiele K, Yeates D. Tension arises from duality at the heart of taxonomy. Nature. 2002;419(6905):337. pmid:12353005
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
11. Thomson S. Management implications of poor alpha taxonomy. Aust. Wildl. Mgmt Soc. Newsl. 1997 March;14–16.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
12. Sangster G, Luksenburg JA. Declining rates of species described per taxonomist: slowdown of progress or a side-effect of improved quality in taxonomy? Syst Biol. 2014;64(1):144–151. pmid:25190593
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
13. Chapman AD. Numbers of living species in Australia and the World. 2nd ed. Canberra: Australian Biological Resources Study; 2009.
14. Kaiser H, Crother BI, Kelly CMR, Luiselli L, O’Shea M, Ota H, et al. Best practices: in the 21st century, taxonomic decisions in herpetology are acceptable only when supported by a body of evidence and published via peer-review. Herpetol Rev. 2013;44(1):8–23.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
15. Rhodin AGJ, Kaiser H, van Dijk PP, Wüster W, O’Shea M, Archer M, et al. Comment on Spracklandus Hoser, 2009 (Reptilia, Serpentes, ELAPIDAE): request for confirmation of availability of the generic name and for the nomenclatural validation of the journal in which it was published. Bull Zool Nomencl. 2015;72(1):65–78.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
16. De Queiroz K. 2007. Species Concepts and Species Delimitation. Systematic Biology, 56 (6): 879–886, https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701701083 pmid:18027281
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
17. Mayden R. L. 1997. A hierarchy of species concepts: the denouement in the saga of the species problem. In Claridge M. F., Dawah H. A. & Wilson M. R. (eds.), Species: The units of diversity,. Chapman & Hall. pp. 381–423
18. Wheeler QD, Meier R. 2000. Species concepts and phylogenetic theory: a debate. Columbia University Press, New York
19. Zachos FE. 2016. Species concepts in biology. Historical development, theoretical foundations and practical relevance. Springer, Cham
20. Evans DM, Che-Castaldo JP, Crouse D, Davis FW, Epanchin-Niell R, Flather CH, et al. Species recovery in the United States: increasing the effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act. Issues in Ecology. 2016;20:1–28.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
21. Morrison WR, Lohr JL, Duchen P, Wilches R, Trujillo D, Mair M, Renner SS. The impact of taxonomic change on conservation: Does it kill, can it save, or is it just irrelevant?. Biol Conserv. 2009;142(12):3201–3206.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
22. Gippoliti S, Cotterill FPD, Zinner D, Groves CP. Impacts of taxonomic inertia for the conservation of African ungulate diversity: an overview. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. pmid:28429851
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
23. CITES. Standard nomenclature. Resolution Conf. 12.11 (Rev. CoP17). [Cited 11 May 2017]. Available from: https://cites.org/eng/res/12/12-11R17.php.
24. Hazevoet CJ. Conservation and species lists: taxonomic neglect promotes the extinction of endemic birds, as exemplified by taxa from eastern Atlantic islands. Bird Conserv Int. 1996;6(2):181–196.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
25. Gutiérrez EE, Helgen KM. 2013. Outdated taxonomy blocks conservation. Nature, 495: 314. pmid:23518556
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
26. Costello MJ, May RM, Stork NE 2013. Response to Comments on “Can we name Earth’s species before they go extinct?” Science 341, 237.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
27. Donegan T, Quevedo A, Verhelst JC, Cortés-Herrera O, Ellery T, Salaman P. Revision of the status of bird species occurring or reported in Colombia 2015, with discussion of BirdLife International’s new taxonomy. Conservación Colombiana. 2015;23:3–48.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
28. Franz N, Gilbert E, Ludäscher B, Weakley A. Controlling the taxonomic variable: taxonomic concept resolution for a southeastern United States herbarium portal. Research Ideas and Outcomes. 2016;2:e10610.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
29. Schuh RT. The Linnaean system and its 250-year persistence. Bot Rev. 2003;69(1):59–78.
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar
30. Pickett STA, Ostfeld RS, Shachak M, Likens GE (eds). The ecological basis of conservation. Heterogeneity, ecosystems, and biodiversity. Dordrecht: Springer; 1997. University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record |
Lists
Lists
