Taxonomy & Contradictions

[christian thompson]

Martin wrote:

However, could you really claim that BOTH conflicting taxonomic
opinions are valid? I don't think so, because that would create a
logical contradiction (one species cannot belong to two genera at the
same time). Instead, as an indexer or databaser, one would have to
stay neutral (not make a statement on validity in this case), or side
with Smith or Jones.

Yes & No:

The answer depends on the purpose of the database.

If one wants to be truly objective and track the published literature,
etc., then one can design a database which tracks MULTIPLE
classifications and makes no distinctions as to which classification is
considered correct / best / valid / or whatever.

So, for a real example: Today there are two published classifications
for mosquitoes. The most recent is by Harbach et alia (2004) and the
most widely used and respected is by Edwards (1932). So, for those who
accept the most recent as the proper classification, the vector of
yellow fever is Stegomyia aegypti (Linnaeus, 1762), but most workers
continue to use Aedes aegypti (Linnaeus, 1762). The original
combination, Culex aegypti Linnaeus, has not been used since the 1830s,
when Meigen developed the first modern classification of mosquitoes. The
database that Richard has designed can, I suspect, track all these
classifications.

And this represents a common conflict. Harbach et alia have not provide
much more insight into the phylogenetic relationships beyond what
Edwards provided, but instead have decided to elevate the subgenera of
Edwards to generic status. So, we merely have the splitters versus the
lumpers. And most taxonomists can understand the situation.

UNFORTUNATELY, most users, especially governments, want a definite
answer. They want the scientists to tell them to use either one
combination or another. So, the BDWD has asked its cooperating
specialist, Richard Wilkerson to make a decision. In turn, Rick has set
up a committee, a website, etc., and is polling the specialist
community. the results are not yet in, but in the end, the BDWD, ITIS,
Species2000, Catalogue of Life, etc., will present to users a single
combination / name. But mosquito taxonomists will still argue over the
issue because there is no accepted procedure / protocol / method for
assigning rank to taxa. That is, both classifications can and do contain
the same phylogenetic information, only the rankings are different.

Oh, well ...




F. Christian Thompson
Systematic Entomology Lab., USDA
c/o Smithsonian Institution
MRC-0169 NHB
PO Box 37012
Washington, DC 20013-7012
(202) 382-1800 voice
(202) 786-9422 FAX
cthompso at sel.barc.usda.gov e-mail
www.diptera.org  web site