The Conversation
Academic rigor, journalistic flair
How a scientific spat over how to name species turned into a big plus for nature
July 26, 2020 3.54pm EDT
https://theconversation.com/how-a-scientific-spat-over-how-to-name-species...
Stephen T. Garnett[1], Les Christidis[2], Richard Pyle[3] and Scott Thomson[4]
1 Professor of Conservation and Sustainable Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University., 2 Professor, Southern Cross University., 3 Associate lecturer, University of Hawaii., 4 Research associate, Universidade de São Paulo.
Taxonomy, or the naming of species, is the foundation of modern biology. It might sound like a fairly straightforward exercise, but in fact it’s complicated and often controversial.
Why? Because there’s no one agreed list of all the world’s species. Competing lists exist for organisms such as mammals and birds, while other less well-known groups have none. And there are more than 30 definitions of what constitutes a species. This can make life difficult for biodiversity researchers and those working in areas such as conservation, biosecurity and regulation of the wildlife trade.
In the past few years, a public debate erupted among global taxonomists, including those who authored and contributed to this article, about whether the rules of taxonomy should be changed. Strongly worded ripostes were exchanged. A comparison to Stalin was floated.
