[Taxacom] standards for taxonomic publications
Pekka T. Lehtinen
pekleh at utu.fi
Wed Jul 19 10:19:11 CDT 2006
Karin Kiontke wrote:
>the Journal of Nematology has appointed a committee to formulate new
>guidelines for the authors of taxonomic publications. These new
>guidelines should account for new methods and new types of data (e.g.
>molecular data, perhaps digital vouchers....).
>As a member of this committee, I am collecting ideas from other
>journals and other taxonomic groups.
>I was wondering whether some of you have such guidelines spelled out
>and could forward them to me.
>One related question is what kind of characters should be required
>for a species description. The traditional view in my field seems to
>be that morphological differences between species must be found.
>Obviously, such a view creates problems with sibling species which
>can be recognized by molecular data. I'd appreciate comments on how
>this is being dealt with in other taxonomic groups.
>Thank you very much!
As a specialist of several groups of terrestrial arthropods I have
waited for the time, when detailed information about the ultrastructural
characters will be added to all descriptions of supraspecific taxa, at
least. I am not speaking here about SEM micrographs of genital organs,
but especially about the ultrastructural SOMATIC characters. Every group
of arthropods seems to have their important groups of ultrastructural
characters, sometimes in the structure of skin, sometimes in different
types of normal hairs, setae, and spines, sometimes details of several
sensory organs, etc. I have repeatedly been much embarrassed looking for
quite recent matrices of even more than hundred characters, BUT THE
ULTRASTRUCTURAL CHARACTER GROUPS TOTALLY LACKING, or represented only
by one or two best known and most striking characters.
According to my experience, the differences between the
ultrastrucure of closely related species are seldom useful for
phylogenetic conclusions, WHILE THE DIFFERENCES OF ULTRASTRUCTURE
BETWEEN ALL SUPRASPECIFIC TAXA OF ARTHROPODA seem to be usually among
the most useful character groups.
Although I have no personal experience about the ultrastructure of
nematod taxa I believe that
there must be a lot of useful characters, as the surface of nematods,
too, is hard.
As to the morphological characters of sibling species I am inclined
to believe that minor (mainly ultrastructural) differences in some parts
of the genital organs will be found in many so called sibling species,
as has already been done at least in some cases of very closely related
pairs of spider species.
Dr. Pekka T. Lehtinen (retired taxonomist)
Biodiversity Center for the UNIVERSITY OF TURKU, Finland
pekleh at utu.fi
More information about the Taxacom