[Taxacom] Pop article on taxonomy's decline
kevin_j_tilbrook at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Jan 26 17:09:58 CST 2011
Less of a rant - more of a rallying cry!
And look, someone saw fit to employ an alpha-taxonomist!
Dr Kevin J. Tilbrook
museum of tropical queensland |queensland museum
70 – 102 flinders street | townsville | queensland 4810 | australia.
t+61 7 4726 0625 | f +61 7 4721 2093 |
kevin.tilbrook at qm.qld.gov.au| www.mtq.qm.qld.gov.au
From: Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Thu, 27 January, 2011 8:57:16
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Pop article on taxonomy's decline
The more we scapegoat electronic biodiversity information management as the
"cause" of the extinction of taxonomists, the faster that extinction will be
upon us. Misdirected blame only adds to the noise.
First of all, it's wrong. My octogenarian PhD Advisor, who has named more new
species of fishes than any living ichthyologist (more than double than the next
most prolific, in fact), and who has authored more taxonomic publications than
any other ichthyologist in history (closing in on 800), *still* praises the
online Catalog of Fishes as a marvel of technology, and one that has improved
his efficiency dramatically. I hear similar sentiments from other
similarly-credentialed "classical" taxonomists studying various groups of
Second of all, the amount of money spent on all database efforts combined is
*trivial* compared to what is needed to correct the problem.
Third, in most cases that money has not come from a source that would have been
available to taxonomists anyway. In other words, these efforts have *increased*
the total amount of dollars supporting the work of taxonomists; not detracted
Fourth, the entire argument is a Red Herring, because the real problem with
misdirected funds is more dollars spent doing lab-based taxonomy, and less
dollars spent doing field-based taxonomy.
I play all roles, and I would rank their importance in the following order:
3) Alpha taxonomist
4) Database Developer
I return again to my consistent rant: We need to spend less time/money figuring
out how organisms are related to each other, and more time/money discovering and
documenting them in nature (while they're still here to discover and document).
I don't mean to disparage systematics or lab-based taxonomy entirely -- both are
important endeavors, and contribute meaningfully to the goal of documenting
biodiversity. The problem is in terms of proportion -- not just proportion of
dollars spent, but proportion of training the next generation of taxonomists.
Finally, we're missing the larger issue. Arguing about how to slice the
bio-dollar pie is akin to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. What we need
to focus on is the SIZE of the pie. We shouldn't be arguing about dollars spent
on informatics vs. dollars spent on alpha taxonomy vs. dollars spent on
phylogenetics. We should be arguing about dollars spent on biodiversity
research vs. physics research vs. astronomy research vs. other "big ticket"
So first, let's convince the world why biodiversity is important (as I have
argued before, it is Earth's *most* important asset for future humanity -- we
just don't realize it yet), and enlarge the size of the pie ten-fold or
100-fold. Then we can argue how to slice that pie up.
Sorry for the rant -- I haven't had food yet today....
Richard L. Pyle, PhD
Database Coordinator for Natural Sciences
Associate Zoologist in Ichthyology
Dive Safety Officer
Department of Natural Sciences, Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Bob Mesibov
> Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 10:36 AM
> To: TAXACOM
> Subject: [Taxacom] Pop article on taxonomy's decline
> "The millions of dollars spent globally on technology to catalog species may
> actually be pushing out the people we rely upon: taxonomists and
> systematists. We’re like young children frantic to add new baseball cards to
> our collections, while the actual creators of the baseball cards themselves
> Nice to see that message getting out to a wider audience.
> Dr Robert Mesibov
> Honorary Research Associate
> Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and School of Zoology, University of
> Tasmania Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
> Ph: (03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
> Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/?articleID=570
> 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
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
Or (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom
your search terms here
More information about the Taxacom