[Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

[John Grehan]

I thought the visual DNA sequence metaphor for phylogeny on the SASB
site to be quite telling - underpinning the idea that DNA sequences are
the essence (and therefore truth) of phylogeny.

John Grehan 

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Bob Mesibov
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 11:39 PM
To: Stephen Thorpe
Cc: TAXACOM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

"I'm not sure what to say in reply to that, except to clarify what I was
saying. The bit you quote me as saying was in reply to someone who was
claiming that projects were evaluated on other grounds. However, there
is a bit of a point here that you might, rather surprisingly, be
missing: let us distinguish taxonomy from systematics."

I admit it, I lifted your point out of its context, because I thought
what you were saying was undeniably true!

But I have to disagree (a little) with you about taxonomy vs
systematics. I joined the two when rewriting the SASB website
(http://www.sasb.org.au/overview.html) because it's obvious that 'in the
real world...the same people often do both taxonomy and phylogenetic
analysis. These scientists are best called systematists.' You could
imagine it this way: there are people who do taxonomy as you describe
it, people who do phylogenetics exclusively, and the overlap group who
do both. Then you could try to work out what proportion of the world's
active community are in each set. I think you'd come unstuck because
individual people move in and out of these sets from year to year and
project to project.

In my experience the funding is also fairly fluid at the institututional
or departmental level: money supports both 'taxonomy' and 'systematics'.
The biggest difference is undoubtedly where you say it is, namely that
individual taxonomists don't get the money that individual systematists
do. But can I suggest that there's a compensating factor? <wild
generalisation>Systematics projects tend to be short-lived and people in
them wander off to do other things. Taxonomic projects tend to be
long-lived (decades!) and people doing them are loyal to the work,
regardless of funding. </wild generalisation>.
--
Dr Robert Mesibov
Honorary Research Associate
Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and School of Zoology, University
of Tasmania Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
Ph: (03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/?articleID=570

_______________________________________________

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