[Taxacom] Taxonomy Anarchy

JF Mate aphodiinaemate at gmail.com
Fri Jun 2 01:56:10 CDT 2017


It isn´t just that they desire a single species concept, but also a
single, incontrovertible species hypothesis. If they went ahead with
this then taxonomy would grind to a halt and most species would go
unrecognized due to the burden of proof necessary to pass whatever
standard was set.
Hopefully you guys can put together a polite yet strongly worded
response in Nature as well.

B

Jason

On 1 June 2017 at 17:47, Scott Thomson <scott.thomson321 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Several of us who were co-authors on my paper in BZN on Case 3601 have
> briefly discussed this. We have issues with the concept of Conservation
> attempting to control taxonomy as this leads to circularity. Taxonomy is a
> science and must have the freedom to perform its function without the
> constraints of other sciences or fields. A point the code also acknowledges.
> Their aim is to constrain taxonomy to a single species concept. This would
> vastly debilitate the development of potential breakthroughs in the future
> of taxonomy. Conservationists are end users of taxonomy and nomenclature, a
> point that taxonomists should recognise with some consideration, but
> taxonomy must have the academic freedom to explore and present its science
> without political influence.
>
> So yes I reject the views of that paper. I also think that they are confused
> on what taxonomy is. When they say that taxonomists would welcome a
> constraint on how taxonomy is done, I get the impression they are referring
> to nomenclature there, not taxonomy.
>
> Cheers, Scott
>
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 12:29 PM, JF Mate <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> When I read the title I assumed it would be about the cladification of
>> classifications or supraspecific oversplitting. Instead it is solving
>> a legal issue by adding lawyers to taxonomy and systematics. What
>> could go wrong.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1 June 2017 at 16:56, Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org> wrote:
>> > Another thing for taxonomists to worry about:
>> >
>> >
>> > https://www.nature.com/news/taxonomy-anarchy-hampers-conservation-1.22064
>> >
>> > "Taxonomy anarchy" and its supposed solution. Journal Nature.
>> >
>> >
>> > -------
>> > Richard H. Zander
>> > Missouri Botanical Garden - 4344 Shaw Blvd. - St. Louis - Missouri -
>> > 63110 - USA
>> > richard.zander at mobot.org<mailto:richard.zander at mobot.org>
>> > Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm and
>> > http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Taxacom Mailing List
>> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> >
>> >
>> > Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years,
>> > 1987-2017.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>>
>> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Scott Thomson
> Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo
> Avenida Nazaré, 481, Ipiranga
> 04263-000, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
>
> Chelonian Research Institute
> 402 South Central Avenue,
> Oviedo, 32765, Florida, USA
>
> http://www.carettochelys.com
> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
> Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/0323517916624728
> Skype: Faendalimas
> Skype Number: +55 (11) 3280 0144
> Mobile Phone: +55 11 994 30 4008
>


More information about the Taxacom mailing list