[Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

[Dave Roberts]

Dear Brian,

agreed that vector systems sometimes require a high degree of taxonomic accuracy.  Is that typical of taxonomy in general?

Cheers,  Dave
--
On 18 Apr 2011, at 12:34, Dr Brian Taylor wrote:

> Well Dave,
> 
> I worked in the attempts to achieve malaria eradication and a precise
> knowledge of the actual and potential vector species using taxonomic
> descriptions was essential, e.g. different species may inhabit different
> breeding sites. Having said that, over the years, cytogenetic and similar
> techniques have shown that "cryptic", i.e. morphologically identical, or
> practically so, species can be important.  I hope that is real world enough
> for you.
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> On 18/04/2011 12:06, "Dave Roberts" <workpackage6 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Fabian,
>> 
>> I pitched a similar question to a group discussing databasing recently.  How
>> badly would you have to corrupt the taxonomic fields of a data-set before you
>> changed the fundamental conclusion of an analysis in any field other than
>> taxonomy itself?
>> 
>> In practical terms, this means fields like conservation strategies, detecting
>> global change and environmental monitoring.  After much sucking of teeth the
>> conclusion was 'quite a lot'.  In other words taxonomic accuracy as currently
>> practiced seems to be quite a lot of unnecessary effort.
>> 
>> Invert the question and ask for an example of a real-world, non-taxonomic
>> problem domain that requires the kind of species accuracy that we presently
>> demand to satisfy taxonomic standards?  It has always seemed to me that in the
>> real world phenotype matters, i.e. the expressed properties of an individual.
>> 
>> Cheers,  Dave
>> --
>> On 18 Apr 2011, at 09:48, Fabian Haas wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>> 
>>> my apologies for the subject of this email, but I thing I have your
>>> attention. I am a taxonomist myself, and working a lot to make taxonomy
>>> matter on various plat forms, so no need to convince me about the
>>> importance of taxonomy.
>>> 
>>> What I am trying to find out i , why we seemingly have not succeeded in
>>> gathering more support for taxonomy in the last 10 yrs or so? Although
>>> we have high political support for the CBD, a variety of interesting
>>> projects, like EOL and GBIF, and many other plat forms distributing
>>> taxonomic information. These success have little contributed -in my
>>> opinion- to improve funding for the production of taxonomic knowledge.
>>> 
>>> Instead of lamenting again, and preaching to the converted, I would like
>>> to find out, why the donors dont seem to react, what are their reasons
>>> not to fund taxonomic work, at all, or at a level would be useful. So I
>>> am looking for their reasons, why they dont seem to receive our message
>>> that we need to taxonomy. And also why taxonomic aspects are often
>>> deleted form projects when money becomes tight, more often than other
>>> section. Taxonomy seems expensible.
>>> 
>>> I do have some suspicions, like they dont know what it is, they simply
>>> dont like the topic, they think everything is known, they thing we dont
>>> need it anyways, its a public good and so available, taxonomy would be
>>> complete, etc.
>>> 
>>> I will certainly try to talk the donors informally to find out what they
>>> think, but what I would like to ask this community, if you have any
>>> first hand experience, first hand statements on that. I will treat all
>>> information confidential if wished, and keep informant and, more
>>> importantly donor, anonymously. It is not about blaming someone, but I
>>> would like to better understand their perspective, with the ultimate
>>> goal to improve our communication strategy, and better address them. We
>>> did work a lot on our/taxonomist communication and I believe all the
>>> necessary answers are ready, collected by BioNET etc, but this change of
>>> perspective -ask the listeners why they dont listen- seems worth wile to me.
>>> 
>>> So Why does Taxonomy NOT matter??
>>> 
>>> Best & Looking forward to hearing from you!
>>> 
>>> Fabian
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 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
> 
> 

-- 
Dr D.McL. Roberts,        Tel: +44 (0)20 7942 5086
European Distributed Institute of Taxonomy Project,
Coordinator WorkPackage 6 (Unifying Revisionary Taxonomy),
Dept. Zoology,
The Natural History Museum,
Cromwell Road,
London        SW7 5BD
Great Britain             Email: dmr at nomencurator dot org
Web page:  http://scratchpads.eu
Web page:  http://www.editwebrevisions.info/
--
"You can't just ask customers what they want and then try and give it to them.  By the time you get it built, they'll want something new." [Steve Jobs, quoted in The Guardian, Technology Section, 25 June 09].
--