[Taxacom] barcode of life wins Ebbe Nielsen Prize

[Schindel, David]

Dear Donat,

I'm afraid you have misinterpreted Krishtalka's statement.  Kris said the impact of BOLD would rival that of GenBank, which was his way of saying that BOLD will have the kind of usage by taxonomists, systematists, and other organismal biologists that GenBank is having among molecular biologists.  He didn't say that BOLD competes with GenBank because Kris knows that they cooperate, not compete.  BOLD records are submitted to GenBank as the ultimate archival repository for barcode records.  The BARCODE data standard is about requirements for barcode records submitted to GenBank, primarily from BOLD.  The Natural History Museum at the University of Kansas, home of the specimen database Specify, have both been involved in our development of the data standard and attempts to build linkages between GenBank and voucher specimens in museum databases.  

Sorry, Donat - there are long and positive interactions among GBIF, BOLD and GenBank.  We can't provide Taxacom with a flame that's worth fanning.

David

David Schindel, Executive Secretary
Consortium for the Barcode of Life
NMNH, Smithsonian Institution

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Donat Agosti
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 8:41 AM
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: [Taxacom] barcode of life wins Ebbe Nielsen Prize

In today's GBIF news letter I discovered the announcement of the Ebbe
Nielsen Prize winner, Mr. Ratnasingham, credited with the development of the
Barcode of Life Data (BOLD) systems.  <http://tinyurl.com/248w6qu>
http://tinyurl.com/248w6qu

 

This in itself is fine, but what I find appalling is the statement of the
Krishtalka, the chair of the GBIF Science Committee, that states "The impact
and strategic significance of BOLD, according to Krishtalka, promises to
rival that of Genbank. "BOLD enables a growing number of scientists to both
register and access critical genomic data in a common way for complex
research and research applications for science and society, both inside and
outside the domains of biodiversity science.""

 

How comes that BOLD (Advancing species indentification and discovery through
the analysis of short, standardized gene regions" wants to compete with
GenBank? How does a short sequence compare with a whole genome? Though
barcodes make some very important contributions to biology, they can not and
will never replace the many gene sequences needed for phylogenetic analysis,
the increasing impact of entire genomes, nor all the other information
needed to define species, such as the rapidly increasing number of digital
online images of taxa in a very simple way.

 

May be I misunderstand this statement, but the very way it is written in the
press release, this shows a very questionable attitude of GBIF's Science
Committee chair, which has little to do with science but rather imperium
building of missing far sight.

 

Donat Agosti 

 

 

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here