[Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

Wed Apr 20 05:06:29 CDT 2011

There are two articles that are relevant to this, and in my view are one of the stumbling blocks why taxonomy has a Dronröschen-Schlaf: We are opaque, not visible to the world at large, not even within our own community where we have no clue what who publishes. And it get's worse with the fight against Google book. Unless we all commit to open access immediately and completely Dornröschen will sleep forever.

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2011/04/19/lessig-at-cern-scientific-knowledge-should-not-be-reserved-for-academic-elite/?utm_source=post&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts

Lessig At CERN: Scientific Knowledge Should Not Be Reserved For Academic Elite

"Most scientific resources are protected on the internet, Lessig said. It can only be accessed by professors and students in a university setting. If “you are a member of the knowledge elite,” he said, then there is free access, but “for the rest of the world, not so much.” "

"In the context of academia, there is a need to recognise its ethical obligation of universal access to knowledge, “not American university access to knowledge, but universal access to knowledge in every part of the globe.” "

And google's loss in the google book case.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/apr/28/googles-loss-publics-gain/
Although it ends with a positive note in the hope of a Digital Public Library of America, I am not sure about this - Google lost not least because of its commercial interests. Publishers have the same and so we need to get out of this game by publishing open access throughout.

Donat

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:09 PM
To: Andrew Mitchell; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

>A case in point is barcoding. The concept has caught the public's imagination 
>and could bring megabucks to taxonomy<

(1) >The concept has caught the public's imagination<

Has it? Citation please!

(2) >and could bring megabucks to taxonomy<

Could it? It will bring megabucks to "systematics" in the broad sense 
(specifically, it will bring megabucks to those who want to do barcoding!) ... 
but will it do anything positive for *taxonomy*?

a case in point: A huge amount of funding is going to this:

>A Model Ecosystem for New Zealand: pilot project
Collaborative project funded through the Allan Wilson Centre
Personnel: Alexei Drummond, Thomas Buckley, Richard Newcomb, Nicola Nelson, 
Craig Millar, Nigel French, Mark Stevens, James Russell, Matt Renner, Jo Hoare, 
Dave Towns and Iwi collaborators.

We describe a pilot project to test the feasibility of phylogenetically and 
environmentally characterizing every species in a well-defined New Zealand Model 
Ecosystem using modern sequencing, informatics, distribution modelling and field 
ecology approaches. The project will involve collaboration with the Department 
of Conservation, and provide a long-term research programme structure for 
collaborative, interdisciplinary research projects at the intersection of 
ecology, evolutionary biology and genomics. <
actually, all it amounts to is "barcode everything" and forget about trying to 
identify the taxa ...

>environmentally characterizing every species<
HAHAHA... "every species" ...

barcoding may be a useful tool for some purposes, but it is like a cuckoo chick, 
throwing all the other chicks (tools) out of the nest (tool box) ...

do we taxacomers really know enough about the astronomy community to be able to 
state with any confidence what sorts of infighting there might be in that 
community, or the relative merits of the various subdisciplines ... I don't 
think I have seen a documentary on TV where taxonomists are protesting about 
barcoding either ...

Stephen

________________________________
From: Andrew Mitchell <Andrew.Mitchell at austmus.gov.au>
To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Wed, 20 April, 2011 7:17:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

Hi All,

I think the real reason that astronomers can get huge grants and taxonomists 
can't is that taxonomists/systematists are such a fractious bunch they just 
can't help but shoot themselves in the foot by protesting vociferously against 
any emerging large initiatives. A case in point is barcoding. The concept has 
caught the public's imagination and could bring megabucks to taxonomy, but 
instead of seeing the possibilities, getting involved and working together to 
integrate and improve this fledgling system many taxonomists would rather fire 
shots from the sidelines.  Have you ever seen a documentary on TV where say 
radioastronomers slam gamma-ray astronomers as having no understanding of their 
subdiscipline? Of course not! They would rather work together to build the 
multi-billion dollar SKA that they can all use.

Now that I'm sticking my neck out I may as well add that funding models which 
favour "innovation" over all else are partly to blame. This is why we have so 
many different initiatives digitising taxonomy (checklists, species pages & 
images, the heritage literature) with limited interactivity - each successive 
proposal must demonstrate that it is doing something "innovative", i.e. 
different from existing projects.

OK, my flame guards are up so fire away!

Andrew

Andrew Mitchell
Integrative Systematist
Entomology

Australian Museum
6 College Street Sydney NSW 2010 Australia
t 61 2 9320 6346  f 61 2 9320 6042
www.australianmuseum.net.au

#####################################################################################

This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared 
by MailMarshal
#####################################################################################

Rituals of Seduction: Birds of Paradise
Are we more alike than you think?
Exhibition 9 April – 7 August 2011

The Australian Museum.

The views in this email are those of the user and do not necessarily reflect the 
views of the Australian Museum. The information contained in this email message 
and any accompanying files is or may be confidential and is for the intended 
recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, 
reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this email or any attached files is 
unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify 
the sender. The Australian Museum does not guarantee the accuracy of any 
information contained in this e-mail or attached files. As Internet 
communications are not secure, the Australian Museum does not accept legal 
responsibility for the contents of this message or attached files.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.
_______________________________________________

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

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 6057 (20110420) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 6057 (20110420) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com