There is a bit of disconnect between nomenclature and the science of systematics that has to be acknowledged. The International Codes stress name stability, but if formal taxon names do refer to hypotheses, albeit almost no one ever specifically states what those hypotheses actually present, then it is often the case that our hypotheses are substantially revised or replaced. Stability in the scientific sense is a myth. Yet, the same formal names continue to be attached to the ‘hypothesis’ regardless of how many times those hypotheses are modified. Citing an original authority for the name offers little to no scientific information if our conceptions of the hypotheses are quite different from the originals. Taxon names aren’t tied to types, they’re tied to scientific hypotheses that account for what we observe among specimens. The specimens are what prompted our inferences of the hypotheses in the first place, as a matter of the goal of science: to increase causal understanding.
There are a lot of loose ends that first need to be considered before jumping to a requirement of citing references for formal names.
Kirk
--
________________________________________
From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] on behalf of Izwandy Idris [izwandy.idris from umt.edu.my]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 7:46 PM
To: annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Antw: Re: [Annelida] on the citations of taxonomic papers
The reasons mentioned by Chris are indeed real. At the research institutes or universities, ecological or applied science research groups tend to not include the original reference/authority of the species in the reference list. One of the reasons is they believe that authors should actually read the paper for it to be cited in the reference list. Well, if a species described in a journal obtainable in the libraries or databases (Zootaxa etc.), that should not be an issue. However, some species were described in papers that we as taxonomists are also struggling to get a copy of it (not to mention language issue and a very brief description). Another issue is the wrong information of the paper listed in the reference list by previous authors. One of the reasons of having a reference section at the end of a scientific paper is for the reader to be able to access/obtain/track the papers that were cited. This is part of integrity check whether the papers cited are trully exist, !
or quoted in a correct way. Unfortunately, we have seen it that some old taxonomic papers are wrongly referred, making the effort to get the paper by non-taxonomists (well even for us as well) are nightmare.
Suggestions:
1. Perhaps IUZN could include an instruction to include authors of ORIGINAL description in the list of reference. At the same time, IF the name has been changed, the author of the paper (that use the organism) should insert a sentence like... Nauphanta mossambica was described as Marphysa mossambica by Peters, 1864.
2. Open letter to the editor - count me in!
3. Encourage non-taxonomists researchers to use WoRMS to cross check the scientific name. I have reviewed an ecological manuscript recently that the authors still use a species name that has been changed SEVERAL YEARS ago.
Izwandy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Glasby" <chris.glasby from nt.gov.au>
To: "Kirk Fitzhugh" <kfitzhugh from nhm.org>, annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu
Sent: Friday, June 1, 2018 9:47:25 AM
Subject: Re: Antw: Re: [Annelida] on the citations of taxonomic papers
The open letter sounds a good idea. We should push for the inclusion of, at least, literature dealing with the original species-level taxonomic concept. But as Kirk notes taxonomic concepts may change, so what are our reasons for excluding taxonomic literature that describe subsequent taxonomic hypotheses, for example a genus change/new combination. Many ecologists are confused by a species authority in parentheses and what it means, and I suspect that this might be one other reason for the wide non-acceptance of citing taxonomic references. Space seems to be the main reason though, as mentioned.
And what could be other possible exceptions for not including taxonomic literature, if any? Ecological papers? Ecological papers dealing with well-known species, for example European carnivorous mammals (which I had to copy edit recently, and was questioning the value of including the taxonomic literature ;)). Tables of comparative species in any paper?
Finally, a note or letter might consider implementation and provide suggestions for journals and editors. Perhaps trialling a system for only marine biological papers, using WoRMS as the literature arbiter. But the literature for other groups is not nearly as well curated as that for polychaetes ...
Just a few random thoughts/questions ...
________________________________________
From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu <annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu> on behalf of Kirk Fitzhugh <kfitzhugh from nhm.org>
Sent: Friday, 1 June 2018 3:18 AM
To: annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Antw: Re: [Annelida] on the citations of taxonomic papers
This is one of the reasons why I offer a philosophy of systematics course. To wit, "Species-level taxon concepts are hypotheses that can change... but species names are firmly tied to types and are not testable" -- Meier, 2017
________________________________________
From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] on behalf of Sergio Salazar [savs551216 from hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 7:26 AM
To: annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Antw: Re: [Annelida] on the citations of taxonomic papers
Dear colleagues,
Please take a look at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/syen.12215
Have fun,
Sergio
________________________________
De: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu <annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu> en nombre de Dieter Fiege <Dieter.Fiege from senckenberg.de>
Enviado: jueves, 31 de mayo de 2018 12:57 p. m.
Para: annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu
Asunto: Antw: Re: [Annelida] on the citations of taxonomic papers
I greatly appreciate this initiative not simply as a means to increase citations of taxonomic papers but to also underline the relevance and long-lasting impact of taxonomic work. E.g. a species description does not have a decay time like results in some other disciplines might. Like Dani, Karen and others I also always suggest to include the relevant taxonomic references in the list of literature cited when I review manuscripts. I have been nagging authors and editors with this request for many years now. Since 2015 I am following this idea also as an associate editor for "Marine Biodiversity" (https://link.springer.com/journal/12526) A common argument often heard against citing taxonomic references is that literature lists become too long and printing costs rise. But with online publishing becoming more and more standard this point becomes less substantive - if it ever was (see Karen's comment re making it easier to find the original reference). Another point being held u!
p is that esp. citations of old works are often quoted faulty and misleading. Well, then there are reviewers and editors, who should straighten that out and pretty soon the correct quotation should become a standard.
[https://static-content.springer.com/cover/journal/12526/48/1.jpg]<https://link.springer.com/journal/12526>
Marine Biodiversity - Springer<https://link.springer.com/journal/12526>
link.springer.com
Marine Biodiversity is a peer-reviewed international journal devoted to all aspects of biodiversity research on marine ecosystems. The journal is a relaunch of the well-known "Senckenbergiana maritima" and covers research at gene, species and ecosystem level that focuses on describing the actors ...
I would like to add another point here: I think that e.g. in ecological papers it would make sense to cite the literature used for the identification of taxa in the Material and Methods section - and naturally list the citation(s) in the list of references. Identification keys are very helpful tools produced by taxonomists not only for use by their kin but for colleagues in a much wider range of fields. Ecologists are always happy if they get a taxonomic key for a certain taxon. Primer or other standard programs for statistical analyses are cited in almost every ecological paper, like standard molecular procedures are in molecular papers (see the example by Sergio), etc. So why not give the taxonomic key the proper credit, which I think it deserves?
So, yes, I think something like an open letter to taxonomists would be a good idea.
Best, Dieter
_______________________________________________
Annelida mailing list
Post: Annelida from net.bio.net
Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
Resources: http://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/
_______________________________________________
Annelida mailing list
Post: Annelida from net.bio.net
Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
Resources: http://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/
_______________________________________________
Annelida mailing list
Post: Annelida from net.bio.net
Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
Resources: http://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/
--
"In this business, nobody ever says the final word: We must all be prepared to be corrected by future development; this is what science is all about" - Kristian Fauchald (1935-2015)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terima kasih, shukran, thank you, trimakassie, obregado, baie dankie, Ñïàñèáî,
Izwandy Idris, PhD.
Head,
South China Sea Repository and Reference Centre (OBIS Node for Malaysia),
Institute of Oceanography and Environment (HICoE in Marine Science);
and
Lecturer,
Marine Science Programme,
School of Marine and Environmental Sciences,
Universiti Malaysia Terengganu,
21030 Kuala Nerus,
Terengganu, MALAYSIA
Phone: +6096683467/3526
Email: izwandy.idris from umt.edu.my/izwandy937 from gmail.com
Scopus ID: 56450468300
Google ID/Scholar: izwandy937
Researchgate: izwandy.idris from umt.edu.my
_______________________________________________
Annelida mailing list
Post: Annelida from net.bio.net
Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
Resources: http://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/
