[Taxacom] Taxonomy Anarchy

Carlos Sarmiento cesarmiento at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 8 06:36:21 CDT 2017


Silence is a way of saying "I agree"

I Believe that pointing at taxonomy as the one to be blamed by the conservation problem is a nice way to hide current trends on human growth and economy models. No conservation strategy will resist a society that measures its wellness on growth.

N

El 7/06/2017, a las 5:37, Alastair Culham <a.culham at reading.ac.uk> escribió:

> I've also seen the debate late in the day but am not sure I agree entirely with Stephen's ignore it and it will go away approach.  Having been closely involved in Catalogue of Life through two major EU grants (4D4Life and i4Life) I'm very aware of the challenge of getting even a basic list of all living organisms together and even more painfully aware of the challenges of getting agreement on a taxonomy.  There is no single species concept that gives acceptable (to the working taxonomic community, and I suspect to the users of taxonomy such as conservationists) species boundaries over all of life and probably no two taxonomic experts on one group that have exactly the same opinion of an optimal classification.  Ultimately use governs all.
> 
> I think Stephen is right in saying "...two authors, who are proposing that a significant bureaucracy is built and hard and complex decisions are agreed to! In short, it ain't gonna happen!" - we've poured millions into Catalogue of Life over many years and it is not a complete work as yet, nor will it ever be - new species are discovered every year, new techniques identify differences not previously spotted, broader data sets some show different species to be the same, opinions on what a species is do change.  Trying to fix an inherently dynamic system is like channelling a river, it works until the first flood.
> 
> However, there are temporary working solutions to the list of species (the Plant List for plants is an obvious one) that are known to be imperfect and incomplete.  Taxonomists have been working with bioinformaticians for decades to try to improve the collation of such lists and the underlying concepts.  It is not a simple matter. 
> 
> The article in Nature is fundamentally false in its assertion that taxonomists make changes without considering others.  Those taxonomic changes are being made to help others - but perhaps the help is not welcome because it then casts doubt on sometimes rather fixed assertions made in those other fields.  Science is fundamentally dynamic and builds on new data and new theories, and it is fundamentally naïve to think taxonomy does not and should not fit the general thread of science.
> 
> My concern is that simply ignoring the article will make taxonomists look either high handed (not bothering to defend the criticism) or scared that another field has a solution to a problem they cannot solve.
> 
> I do hope to see a repost to the opinion.
> 
> Alastair
> 
> ____________________________________________
> 
> Dr Alastair Culham
> Harborne Building, School of Biological Sciences
> University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AS, U.K.
> 
> Associate Professor of Botany, Curator, Reading University Herbarium (RNG)
> University Teaching Fellow, Associate Editor, Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society
> ____________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
> Sent: 07 June 2017 10:59
> To: Taxacom(taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu} <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org>
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Taxonomy Anarchy
> 
> Sorry for the late comment on this, and I've been too busy to read all the other replies, but, at the risk of repeating what others may have already said, I would now like to make a brief comment: 
> 
> Don't panic! This is an opinion piece by two authors, who are proposing that a significant bureaucracy is built and hard and complex decisions are agreed to! In short, it ain't gonna happen! No need to react, just do nothing and nothing will happen!
> 
> Stephen
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> On Fri, 2/6/17, Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org> wrote:
> 
> Subject: [Taxacom] Taxonomy Anarchy
> To: "Taxacom(taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu}" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Received: Friday, 2 June, 2017, 2:56 AM
> 
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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