[Taxacom] Taxonomy Anarchy

igor pavlinov ipvl2008 at mail.ru
Fri Jun 2 09:37:24 CDT 2017


Well, there are two peaces to be put apart: 1) scientific reasoning and 2) pragmatic (protection etc) reasoning of keeping species classifications as stable as possible.

The first one is not conisered here as irrelivant: science cannot be kept stable by any "directions", otherwise it is not science but dogma. 

The second one is a matter of a lot of practical questions and suugections concerning, among other  things, incorporating the taxonomic novelties due to research activity into the practice governed by bureaucratic (including politicains') unwilling to act.

Instead of going deep into discussion, I'd just call your attention on a possible practical suggestion concerning legislative regulation of species "splitting". A resolution might be as following: to assigne "authomatically" the same protection status to any "pieces" of a species, appeared due to the latter's splitting by taxonomic investigation, as to the original ("lumped") species already in any legislation lists.

I guess, some competent  and interested lawyer would be happy to play such game and to find some precedents from the social jurisprudence in support of the just above suggestion.

Bests, Igor


- - -
Igor Ya. Pavlinov, DrS
Zoological Museum of Lomonosov Moscow State University
ul. Bol'shaya Nikitskaya 6
125009 Moscow 
Russia
http://zmmu.msu.ru/personal/pavlinov/pavlinov_eng1.htm

>Пятница,  2 июня 2017, 16:44 +03:00 от Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>:
>
>The logic behind the arguments that are raised in the article reaches 
>deep inside the scientific community and deverses a published correction.
>I consider a response as necessary and would also sign it.
>
>I am not perfectly in aggreement with all recent comments here. There is 
>freedom of press, also in science, and I have no objections to Nature 
>publishing such articles. As long as we can respond, that is fine for me.
>One of the jobs of the press is to point out things that are discussed 
>controversally in the community. For us the arguments may sound silly, 
>for others obviously not.
>
>An important feature of natural sciences is that there is no eternal 
>truth. The authors of the article have ignored that.
>Taxonomic classifications are the result of scientific research and as 
>such, they will always remain proposals, and there can be no official 
>classifications.
>
>A discussion in the sense that unified standards of how to define 
>species are desired, and should be accepted by the community, is fine 
>for me, but must no be extended to a form as suggested in this article.
>
>ICZN is mentioned in the Nature paper, as one of the branches of IUBS 
>that should govern taxonomic issues. ICZN governs nomenclature, not 
>taxonomy. The decision concerning the definition of the species concept 
>to be applied is not part of the tasks of the ICZN.
>
>One more detail from the point of view of zoological nomenclature: An 
>outdated name is not an invalid name.
>You can continue using it, for example in a legal document that remains 
>in force, and that name will remain valid. A valid classification is not 
>necessarily up to date, and is not necessarily commonly accepted.
>
> From my perspective I see no reason why any species should fall outside 
>legal protection just because a new scientific publication proposes to 
>use a different name and classification for it.
>
>So as long as the law is in force, and not updated, this one sheep 
>species in Kazakhstan should remain protected in the sense of the name 
>as it was understood at the time when the law was established. This 
>keeps standing for all nine or however many subpopulations that were 
>meant at that time, regardless of which names and classifications will 
>be used for them later, and also regardless of whether or not those 
>classifications are commonly accepted.
>I would not agree with the authors that 25 Chinese species would 
>automatically fall outside legal protection for such reasons. If the law 
>contains provisions like "The species is protected as long as it is 
>listed in a continuously updated catalog", then we need to teach 
>politicians to avoid such statements, and to replace them by saying 
>"protected in the sense of the accepted classification at the date of 
>ratification".
>
>Cheers
>Francisco
>
>-----
>Francisco Welter-Schultes
>
>Am 02.06.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Wolfgang Wuster:
>> Uwe nailed it.
>> 
>> Personally, I feel this should be responded to, and would be happy to sign any response.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wolfgang
>> 
>> --
>> Dr. Wolfgang Wüster  -  Senior Lecturer
>> School of Biological Sciences
>> Bangor University
>> Environment Centre Wales
>> Bangor LL57  2UW
>> Wales, UK
>> 
>> Tel:  +44 1248 382301
>> Fax:  +44 1248 382569
>> E-mail:  w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk
>>  http://mefgl.bangor.ac.uk/staff/wuster.php
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Uwe Fritz
>> Sent: 02 June 2017 09:34
>> To: jaakko.hyvonen at helsinki.fi;  dyanega at ucr.edu
>> Cc:  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Taxonomy Anarchy
>> 
>> Such papers get highly cited. Further questions?
>> 
>>>>> Hyvönen, Jaakko T 06/02/17 5:47 AM >>>
>> how come these kind of silly proposals get repeatedly published in
>> high-profile journals? perhaps this is something that deserved to be
>> also mentioned, politely
>> ;-), in the rebuttal?
>> 
>> all the best, and let´s continue to try to keep our knowledge about
>> biological diversity organized, jaakko
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 02 Jun 2017, at 01:59, Doug Yanega > wrote:
>> 
>> On 6/1/17 3:37 PM, Richard Pyle wrote:
>> I began drafting a rebuttal Correspondence note to Nature before I was
>> even finished reading the article.  I'm glad to see I'm not the only one
>> who had a similar reaction.
>> 
>> If you want potential co-authors, there are a LOT of people posting
>> about this in other places, including FaceBook, and some have already
>> been asking others about co-authoring rebuttals. Might be productive to
>> try to coordinate, and I can possibly help connect people, including
>> people involved in conservation ecology.
>> 
>> Realistically, all it would likely require is one Google Doc whose link
>> can be given out to potential co-authors, selectively.
>> 
>> Peace,
>> 
>> --
>> Doug Yanega      Dept. of Entomology       Entomology Research Museum
>> Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314     skype: dyanega
>> phone: (951)  827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
>>  http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
>>   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
>>         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>> 
>> Jaakko Hyvönen
>> Finnish Museum of Natural History (Botany) & Dept. Biosci. (Plant
>> Biology)
>> PO Box 7, FIN-00014 UNIV. HELSINKI, FINLAND
>> 
>> e-mail  jaakko.hyvonen at helsinki.fi
>> phone cell +358-(0)50-5171184
>> skype       jaakkohyvonen +358-(0)3 74118298
>> 
>> helsinki.fi/~jhyvonen
>> 
>> "Älä ole mulkku"
>> Teemu Potapoff valomerkki.fi 15.i.2016
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>> 
>> 
>> Rhif Elusen Gofrestredig 1141565 - Registered Charity No. 1141565
>> 
>> Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi, gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y neges e-bost hon trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar unwaith a dilewch y neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi, rhaid i chi beidio a defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i hanfonodd yn unig ac nid yw o anghenraid yn cynrychioli barn Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu 100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract rhwymol - mae rhestr o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.
>> 
>> This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you must not use, retain or disclose any information contained in this email. Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Bangor University. Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or any attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure. Unless expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this email is not intended to form a binding contract - a list of authorised signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance Office.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.



More information about the Taxacom mailing list