[Taxacom] General call to collaboration

[Adam Cotton]

It seems to me that our discussion both here and on the ICZN list is 
missing an important point.

Taxonomists study organisms in order to provide valid names and 
classifications to other users of those names, such as ecologists, 
behaviourists etc etc.

If species a and b only apparently differ in their barcode sequences but 
are not diagnosed in their original descriptions by any characters 
visible to those end users of the names those names are not exactly very 
useful per se.

Obviously subsequently taxonomists can examine the morphological 
characters of species a and b very minutely in order to look for 
constant characters which distinguish them without having to resort to 
sequencing.

In this regard a paper naming new species based solely on differences in 
barcode sequences is useful in pointing out the molecular difference, 
and asks questions in the minds of other taxonomists working on the same 
group; but it's not much use to the field biologist who wants to assign 
the correct name to the species he has found in his habitat.

One consideration is of course whether or not a male and a female with 
slightly differing barcodes can/do meet, mate and produce fertile 
offspring in the wild. Is a small difference in the barcode of one 
specimen versus another always significant enough to delineate separate 
species without any perceived morphological difference?

Adam.