[Taxacom] the hurdle for all biodiv informatics initiatives

Paul Kirk p.kirk at cabi.org
Sat Feb 20 05:46:45 CST 2010

do not confuse databases of biodiversity information (e.g. IPNI, IF, CoL, which are mostly full) with (some) biodiversity information aggregator portals which may be patchy and sometimes "mostly empty"


From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of dipteryx at freeler.nl
Sent: Sat 20/02/2010 10:12
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] the hurdle for all biodiv informatics initiatives

Van: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz]
Verzonden: za 20-2-2010 0:14

Hi Paul,
A frequent complaint you seem to voice about all biodiversity databases, including Wikispecies, is that they don't, by your estimation, contain much in the way of "useful" information. To my mind, however, they function to organise vast numbers references (preferably with links of some kind to those references) in a taxonomic way. The "useful information" is contained in the references, and not in the database per se. This is certainly how I view Wikispecies - a vast taxonomically organised library/bibliography, supplemented where possible with images...

Yes, among the concerns I have voiced (consistently, I hope, rather
than "frequently") is that the biodiversity databases appear to be
mostly empty infrastructure, waiting for content to (magically?)
manifest itself. (The only aspect where content is 'magically'
manifesting itself is in the form of pictures: a surprising amount
of pictures is available on the web, in great part from books
that by their age have entered the public domain, but also from
enthusiastic photographers)

In how far references can yield this "useful information" is an open
question. For some species the original description or the most recent
monograph will yield state-of-the-art information. However, this will
not universally, or even generally, be the case: often a lot more
information will exist. In extreme cases so much information exists for
a single species that even a mere bibliography can be daunting.

But certainly it is very desirable for Wikispecies (or any biodiversity
initiative) to list (taxon by taxon) what taxonomic treatment is being
followed (backed up by a reference where necessary). Most parts of
Wikispecies that I have seen fall short of this standard.



Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org <http://taxacom.markmail.org/> 

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted with it is confidential and is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is prohibited. 

Whilst CAB International trading as CABI takes steps to prevent the transmission of viruses via e-mail, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail or attachment is free from computer viruses and you are strongly advised to undertake your own anti-virus precautions.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail at cabi at cabi.org or by telephone on +44 (0)1491 829199 and then delete the e-mail and any copies of it.

CABI is an International Organization recognised by the UK Government under Statutory Instrument 1982 No. 1071.


More information about the Taxacom mailing list