Undescribed species and the Internet

[Richard Pyle]

> An illustration has no value in science until it has a valid name attached
> to it.

I disagree with this statement.  During a 1997 expedition to Palau for the
purpose of surveying the fauna of deep-reef habitat, I set up a daily
web-based log, which included images of specimens of probable new species
that we had collected on each day.
(see: http://www.bishopmuseum.org/research/treks/palautz97/)

Before the expedition, I had alerted my ichthyological colleagues to the URL
(which was available publicly). Moreover, whenever I collected something I
knew to be of particular interest to a specific taxonomist or group of
taxonomists, I'd send an email to them that evening with a link directly to
the image of interest.  Each morning, before heading out on the next day's
survey dives, I would check my email for messages from colleagues, which
included comments to the effect of, "Your specimen x is a known species, but
specimen y is very interesting!".  This would help me direct my collecting
efforts that day, such that I would put less emphasis on collecting things
similar to specimen x, and more emphasis on collecting things similar to
specimen y.  It turned out to be an incredibly helpful system for
re-focusing subsequent collecting efforts.  I only regret that the digital
imaging technology available to me at the time was inadequate for obtaining
decent images of smaller specimens.  Today's affordable digital imaging
technology is leaps & bounds ahead of what was available in 1997.  I had
planned to set-up a similar daily web log for an expedition to Fiji earlier
this year, but I didn't get my act together in time.  However, I certainly
plan to make this mechanism of real-time information availability a standard
part of future expeditions.

Maybe I'm living in a niche world, but it seems to me that this sort of
real-time exchange of information between field-based survey efforts, and
the global taxonomic expert community, would lead to much more efficient and
effective survey efforts for almost any sort of critter or weed -- marine,
terrestrial, or otherwise.  Not only would this help improve survey
efficiency, but it would also help different researchers who have
independently discovered the same or similar undescribed species become
aware of each other's finds -- perhaps pointing to collaborations, and
minimizing redundant nomenclature. In fact, I would dare say that such
real-time information availability will be downright necessary if we have
any hope of completing a comprehensive survey of global biodiversity.

> There are also unscrupulous people about who can, and will (it has
> happened!), take your pictures and use them in their own revisions of a
> group or groups.  If you are "scooped" by this process, then the names you
> are about to propose can never be valid.

I agree this is a real problem, but I see it as one that is relatively
trivial in scale compared to the potential benefits of real-time data
accessibility.  Problems of taxonomic "piracy" could be further mitigated by
ensuring more robust negative professional consequences for those
unscrupulous researchers who think they can improve their own legacy by
stealing the discoveries of others.

Aloha,
Rich

Richard L. Pyle
Ichthyology, Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
http://www.bishopmuseum.org/bishop/HBS/pylerichard.html
"The opinions expressed are those of the sender, and not necessarily those
of Bishop Museum."