[Taxacom] Describing taxa for conservation purposes

Sat Sep 4 12:12:28 CDT 2021

Scott - please make sure to announce your article on Taxacom when it is
published (and a link if it is open access).

On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 11:20 AM Scott Thomson via Taxacom <
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> sorry I forgot to answer your specific question.
>
> In the paper I have in press we look at several case studies. For different
> points. On this issue the two we use are the tupunali orangutan and giraffe
> though from different perspectives.
>
> One we did not use is in the description of Chelodina mccordi rotiensis it
> was stated that it was made a subspecies so it would inherit the CITES
> status of Chelodina mccordi without the need for assessment. Work since
> this time would indicate it is a species.
>
> There are numerous examples of this, some are less obvious than others.
>
> Cheers Scott
>
> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 12:47 AM Daniel Gustafsson via Taxacom <
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I recently came across this publication:
> > https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24750263.2020.1857852
> >
> > In it, the authors "describe" a new subgenus for a species of North
> > American squirrel (Tamiasciurus mearnsi). The driving force behind this
> > seems to be that "Tamiasciurus" means "hoarder squirrel", and T. mearnsi
> > doesn't hoard, so the genus name in inappropriate. They instead suggest
> > "pseudotamias" (sic) as a subgenus (narrowly avoiding the already
> > proposed Pseudotamia Stephens, 1829), despite also making clear that
> > this species is "a descendant of T. douglasii, phylogenetically as well
> > as biogeographically".
> >
> > Another driving force behind this new subgenus appear to be for pure
> > conservation reasons. The authors spend a lot of time complaining about
> > how little funds are allocated to squirrel conservation in North America
> > (only 0.00001% of GDP! and that is for all small mammals, not just
> > squirrels!), and the hunting policies of North American squirrels. They
> > conclude:
> > "Also, a wider structural change is needed in the approach of how
> > taxonomy, research and conservation management are done for a more
> > sustainable human-nature interaction."
> >
> > This comes at the heels of this confused gem:
> > "Taxonomy as a field of study is rather complex and classifications
> > remain widely disagreed upon and unclear. Often chaotically dominated by
> > just a few players, institutions, and mindsets, this system leaves out
> > the wider public. It is not sustainable, hardly meaningful, and
> > certainly not scientific or democratic. This can be resolved by a more
> > holistic classification system, including all
> > species-/genera-interfering characteristics rather than only single ones
> > (morphological appearance, genetical relations etc.). Additionally,
> > increased budget assignments for small mammals, especially squirrels,
> > can have a major impact on their conservation success. Higher law
> > enforcement for hunting regulations can additionally strongly contribute
> > to science-based management for these squirrels."
> > and a few tables where they show how "taxonomy and classification
> > disputes exist and affect conservation efficiency", some of which
> > examples seem to have no connection to taxonomy, and many of which do
> > not reference any taxonomic or phylogenetic research more recent than
> > the 1990s.
> >
> > The part about how we should use a "holistic classification system,
> > including all species-/genera-interfering characteristics" is
> > particularly weird, as the only "characteristics" they use to establish
> > this new subgenus are morphometrics (average body length and average
> > body mass) and the differences in hoarding behaviour, while disregarding
> > all genetic and other moprhological data.
> >
> > This is a long and rambling paper, but the essence (as far as I can
> > tell) is that the authors think that more money should be spent on
> > conserving a squirrel (more than 0.00001% of GDP), and the best way to
> > do so is to move it to a new subgenus. I assume this subgenus is also
> > available from this publication, as they do include measurements that
> > purportedly separate the type species from the other two species in the
> > genus (which according to the sources they cite would the form
> > paraphyletic nominate subgenus).
> >
> > ---
> >
> > The same journal also published this:
> > https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11250003.2014.895060
> >
> > Abstract (in part):
> > "While we are fully aware of the high degree of arbitrariness of
> > subspecific designations, it is also a fact that taxonomic recognition
> > supports conservation, because subspecies are a legal category whereas
> > other designations (such as evolutionarily significant units, ESUs) are
> > not. We therefore argue that the Mesola red deer should be assigned to a
> > subspecies of their own, and give an official description of Cervus
> > elaphus italicus nova ssp., including the designation of a holo- and a
> > paratype specimen."
> >
> > They seem to make a much better argument than the first paper, but still
> > base their decision to describe a new taxon partially on how this will
> > make it easier to get funding for conservation work.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > I am wondering, does anyone know more examples like this? Where
> > conservation issues are driving or influencing taxonomic decisions?
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Daniel R. Gustafsson, Research Assistant Professor
> > Institute of Zoology Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
> >
> > Ask me about chewing lice!
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
> >
>
>
> --
> Scott Thomson
>
> Centro de Estudos dos Quelônios da Amazônia - CEQUA
> Petrópolis, Manaus
> State of Amazonas, 69055-010
> Brasil
>
> http://www.carettochelys.com
> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
> Lattes: *http://lattes.cnpq.br/0323517916624728*
> <
> https://wwws.cnpq.br/cvlattesweb/PKG_MENU.menu?f_cod=1E409F4BF37BFC4AD13FD58CDB7AA5FD#
> >
> Skype: Faendalimas
> Mobile Phone Brasil: +55 11 98178 7270
> Whatsapp: +55 11 98178 7270
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
>