[Taxacom] taxonomic "vandalism?"

Fri Oct 6 16:20:08 CDT 2017

Mike,

Shouldn't the fact that this is a long-standing problem motivate us to find a solution?

Wolfgang

--
Dr. Wolfgang Wüster  -  Senior Lecturer
School of Biological Sciences
Bangor University
Environment Centre Wales
Bangor LL57  2UW
Wales, UK

Tel: +44 1248 382301
Fax: +44 1248 382569
E-mail: w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk
http://mefgl.bangor.ac.uk/staff/wuster.php

________________________________
From: Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
Sent: 06 October 2017 17:39
To: Wolfgang Wuster; Doug Yanega; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] taxonomic "vandalism?"

Wolfgang,

Of course I can see that what you describe is difficult to deal with, and something we should all try to avoid, but not that it is the end of the world.  Marice Pic described 38,000 species, mostly in his two privately published journals, with virtually never an illustration, the types in his personal collection (horribly curated), and descriptions of 2-6 lines, often without even mentioning what family they belonged to. So for shear scale, you have a minor problem relatively.  Yet, we deal with Pic's names.  And with Thomas Lincoln Casey's (same situation but with only 17,000 names and better descriptions).  Why is your situation so special?  Poor taxonomists are there so we have something to curse at the bar, but they will always be around.  You give him so much attention, I suspect it actually encourages him to be outrageous?

Mike

On 10/6/2017 10:05 AM, Wolfgang Wuster wrote:
Mike,

I don’t think you fully appreciate the multifaceted nature of the problem, which involves a complex interplay of different combinations of poor ethics, poor quality, and the sheer volume of material involved.

First, there *have* been multiple instances of taxa being hastily “described” that others were intending to name, and where there was good reason to believe that they were. Examples include multiple species described based on published in-depth phylogeographic studies, often very shortly after publication of the phylogeographic study, and even cases where the aim of scooping someone else was expicitly stated. So there are certainly multiple instances of practices you term as “immoral in my view, and against the Recommendations that follow the Code”, although they make up a minority of the total number of names. To go back to your initial point when you started the topic, you could of course argue that publishing *any* phylogeographic study while leaving potential new species unnamed is careless or negligent. Personally, I cannot reconcile myself with the view that we should let fear of these unethical practices dictate how we write our papers or communicate in science.

For the rest, the vandalism problem resides more in the (lack of) quality and the quantity of output.

Of course we all use range maps and published phylogenies to direct our research- that’s what they are there for. Spot an allopatric distribution and think there might be something to it? Great – hit a museum, collect some samples, run some sequences – whatever – and write it up with due methods and materials and results. And if there is competition between researchers working at a reasonable level of quality, then the first in print wins - not ideal, but we’ve all seen it happen without it being a big deal or there being accusations of vandalism. Heck, I recently reviewed a manuscript describing a species I had planned to describe myself, but since the authors had gathered better material than I had access  to and got on with it when I hadn’t, I cheered it on and it’s just been published – good on them. Believe it or not, I do live in the real world.

At the risk of repeating the obvious at nauseam, in the contested cases, we see “descriptions” with the common feature of no M&M, a never-examined type randomly selected from a museum catalogue and entirely unsubstantiated claims of purported diagnostic characters. No actual sources of evidence, no specimens examined, and of course no DNA data. In other cases, every species in what was a single genus is given its own genus name, presumably in the expectation that one or other will eventually turn out to be available. And so on. Now multiply by many hundred. Those are not “taxonomic insights … later validated by re-examination of the data”, as you put it. And therefore, I do not accept that denouncing the de facto validation of these practices by the Code is simply a question of “being mad at someone for getting there first”, or, where it’s done on the industrial scale seen in herpetology, “a tempest in a teapot”.

Cheers,

Wolfgang

--
Dr. Wolfgang Wüster  -  Senior Lecturer
School of Biological Sciences
Bangor University
Environment Centre Wales
Bangor LL57  2UW
Wales, UK

Tel: +44 1248 382301
Fax: +44 1248 382569
E-mail: w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk<mailto:w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk>
http://mefgl.bangor.ac.uk/staff/wuster.php

From: Michael A. Ivie [mailto:mivie at montana.edu]
Sent: 06 October 2017 15:50
To: Wolfgang Wuster <w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk><mailto:w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk>; Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] taxonomic "vandalism?"

Now Wolfgang, to your second point.  As I  have followed this issue over the last few years, it was my understanding that the "vandal" was taking published data and naming taxa that were shown in such things as phylogenies and distribution maps, and using them to name taxa that the original authors were intending to name with the same data.  What you describe is simply taxonomic insight leading to new names.  What you say is "Most" of what is done is what we all do - take a new look at data and describe the new stuff, where is the allegation of "theft" in this?   The fact that you say "some turn out to be the oldest available names when someone else later does the work leading to recognition of the taxon as valid" shows clearly that those taxonomic insights, at least, are later validated by reexamination of the data.    Being mad that someone got there first is just being ridiculous.

Everyone in our business is somewhere on the scale of perfect to terrible when it comes to creating synonyms.  I certainly have named things that turned out to be synonyms, but (so far) no one has called me a "vandal."

So, my original point was based on the apparent misunderstanding that this charge of "vandalism" was because of using published or publicized data that were going to be used for a later nomenclatural act to "scoop" the original authors.  This is immoral in my view, and against the Recommendations that follow the Code.  If this is not the case in the majority of cases, this is just a tempest in a teapot over a person who does not conform to our ideas of "best practices."

Mike

On 10/6/2017 1:16 AM, Wolfgang Wuster wrote:

Two things:

First, I don't think there is a neutral position here.

To give an analogy: if I fall asleep in a public place with my wallet lying unsecured next to me, then I am doing something very stupid. However, if someone takes the wallet, criminal law would still consider them a thief, with all the usual penalties. The Code would let them keep the wallet. Neither of those is a neutral position.

Second, I don't think it's fair to say that most of the contentious descriptions are based on data carelessly left lying around by herpetologists. Most of these "descriptions" were pre-emptive and based on things like allopatric distributions in field guides, mitochondrial phylogeographic studies (neither of which by themselves justify new species descriptions) or weakly supported nodes in major supermatrix phylogenies (for genera). Many of the resulting names are of course just synonyms, but some turn out to be the oldest available names when someone else later does the work leading to recognition of the taxon as valid. In most of these cases, there is no case to be made that earlier workers were negligent, or even overly slow, in naming something: the name preceded the evidence.

Cheers,

Wolfgang

--
Dr. Wolfgang Wüster  -  Senior Lecturer
School of Biological Sciences
Bangor University
Environment Centre Wales
Bangor LL57  2UW
Wales, UK

Tel: +44 1248 382301
Fax: +44 1248 382569
E-mail: w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk<mailto:w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk>
http://mefgl.bangor.ac.uk/staff/wuster.php

________________________________
From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of Ivie, Michael <mivie at montana.edu><mailto:mivie at montana.edu>
Sent: 06 October 2017 02:28
To: Doug Yanega; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] taxonomic "vandalism?"

Not even close, Doug, what you quote out of context is not part of the Code, see the intro to the Appendeces.  The Code itself is neutral, and applies equally to any situation, immoral or not.

Mike
__________________________________________________
Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.

NOTE: two addresses with different Zip Codes depending on carriers

US Post Office Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
PO Box 173145
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA

UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59718
USA

(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu<mailto:mivie at montana.edu>

________________________________________
From: Taxacom [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>] on behalf of Doug Yanega [dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>]
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 6:47 PM
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] taxonomic "vandalism?"

On 10/5/17 5:20 PM, Michael A. Ivie wrote:
> Blaming the Code is equivalent to blaming the victim.  The Code is
> equally available to both the "victim" and the "vandal."  It is
> neutral and blameless.
>
Actually, no, the Code is not neutral about this; it does take a clear
stance on this exact issue, in Appendix A:

"2. A zoologist should not publish a new name if he or she has reason to
believe that another person has already recognized the same taxon and
intends to establish a name for it (or that the taxon is to be named in
a posthumous work). A zoologist in such a position should communicate
with the other person (or their representatives) and only feel free to
establish a new name if that person has failed to do so in a reasonable
period (not less than a year)."

Stealing other's intellectual property may not make your name
unavailable, but it DOES violate the explicit text of the Code, above.
When we asked for opinions from the taxonomic community whether this
passage and the others in Appendix A should be made part of the
legislative text (e.g., replace the term "should not" with "must not",
and make availability contingent upon compliance), we got a lukewarm
response from a handful of people. Evidently, and counterintuitively,
taxonomists don't care enough about intellectual property to WANT any
rules protecting it (or, at least, not enough to write letters
indicating their concern). Otherwise, they should have written letters
to the Commission when we openly pleaded with them to do so, about this
EXACT problem, just a few years ago.

Sincerely,

--
Doug Yanega      Dept. of Entomology       Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314     skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html<http://cache.ucr.edu/%7Eheraty/yanega.html>
Doug's Personal Page - University of California, Riverside<http://cache.ucr.edu/%7Eheraty/yanega.html>
cache.ucr.edu
Home of "Curious Scientific Names", along with assorted links to entomology, ecology, biodiversity, reference sites, utilities, and a little entertainment.

   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82

_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>,
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
Taxacom Info Page - mailman.nhm.ku.edu Mailing Lists<http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom>
mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Taxacom is an e-mail list for biological systematics. Named and brought to life by Drs. Richard Zander and Patricia Eckel, Taxacom began its peripatetic existence on ...

The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
[http://taxacom.markmail.org/images/hdi_godwin.gif]<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>

Taxacom Home - MarkMail - Community libraries<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
taxacom.markmail.org
MarkMail is developed and hosted by MarkLogic Corporation. MarkMail is a free service for searching mailing list archives, with huge advantages over traditional ...

Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
Taxacom Info Page - mailman.nhm.ku.edu Mailing Lists<http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom>
mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Taxacom is an e-mail list for biological systematics. Named and brought to life by Drs. Richard Zander and Patricia Eckel, Taxacom began its peripatetic existence on ...

You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>

Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>,
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
Taxacom Info Page - mailman.nhm.ku.edu Mailing Lists<http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom>
mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Taxacom is an e-mail list for biological systematics. Named and brought to life by Drs. Richard Zander and Patricia Eckel, Taxacom began its peripatetic existence on ...

The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
[http://taxacom.markmail.org/images/hdi_godwin.gif]<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>

Taxacom Home - MarkMail - Community libraries<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
taxacom.markmail.org
MarkMail is developed and hosted by MarkLogic Corporation. MarkMail is a free service for searching mailing list archives, with huge advantages over traditional ...

Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
Taxacom Info Page - mailman.nhm.ku.edu Mailing Lists<http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom>
mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Taxacom is an e-mail list for biological systematics. Named and brought to life by Drs. Richard Zander and Patricia Eckel, Taxacom began its peripatetic existence on ...

You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>

Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.

Rhif Elusen Gofrestredig 1141565 - Registered Charity No. 1141565

Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi, gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y neges e-bost hon trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar unwaith a dilewch y neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi, rhaid i chi beidio a defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i hanfonodd yn unig ac nid yw o anghenraid yn cynrychioli barn Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu 100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract rhwymol - mae rhestr o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you must not use, retain or disclose any information contained in this email. Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Bangor University. Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or any attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure. Unless expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this email is not intended to form a binding contract - a list of authorised signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance Office.

--

__________________________________________________

Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.

NOTE: two addresses with different Zip Codes depending on carriers

US Post Office Address:

Montana Entomology Collection

Marsh Labs, Room 50

PO Box 173145

Montana State University

Bozeman, MT 59717

USA

UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:

Montana Entomology Collection

Marsh Labs, Room 50

1911 West Lincoln Street

Montana State University

Bozeman, MT 59718

USA

(406) 994-4610 (voice)

(406) 994-6029 (FAX)

mivie at montana.edu<mailto:mivie at montana.edu>

Rhif Elusen Gofrestredig 1141565 - Registered Charity No. 1141565

Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi, gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y neges e-bost hon trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar unwaith a dilewch y neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi, rhaid i chi beidio a defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i hanfonodd yn unig ac nid yw o anghenraid yn cynrychioli barn Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu 100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract rhwymol - mae rhestr o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you must not use, retain or disclose any information contained in this email. Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Bangor University. Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or any attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure. Unless expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this email is not intended to form a binding contract - a list of authorised signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance Office.

--
__________________________________________________

Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.

NOTE: two addresses with different Zip Codes depending on carriers

US Post Office Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
PO Box 173145
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA

UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59718
USA

(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu<mailto:mivie at montana.edu>

Rhif Elusen Gofrestredig 1141565 - Registered Charity No. 1141565

Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi, gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y neges e-bost hon trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar unwaith a dilewch y neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi, rhaid i chi beidio a defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i hanfonodd yn unig ac nid yw o anghenraid yn cynrychioli barn Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu 100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract rhwymol - mae rhestr o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you must not use, retain or disclose any information contained in this email. Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Bangor University. Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or any attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure. Unless expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this email is not intended to form a binding contract - a list of authorised signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance Office.