Lists of species underpin many fields of human endeavour, but there are currently no universally accepted principles for deciding which biological species should be accepted when there are alternative taxonomic treatments (and, by extension, which scientific names should be applied to those species). As improvements in information technology make it easier to communicate, access, and aggregate biodiversity information, there is a need for a framework that helps taxonomists and the users of taxonomy decide which taxa and names should be used by society whilst continuing to encourage taxonomic research that leads to new species discoveries, new knowledge of species relationships, and the refinement of existing species concepts. Here, we present 10 principles that can underpin such a governance framework, namely (i) the species list must be based on science and free from nontaxonomic considerations and interference, (ii) governance of the species list must aim for community support and use, (iii) all decisions about list composition must be transparent, (iv) the governance of validated lists of species is separate from the governance of the names of taxa, (v) governance of lists of accepted species must not constrain academic freedom, (vi) the set of criteria considered sufficient to recognise species boundaries may appropriately vary between different taxonomic groups but should be consistent when possible, (vii) a global list must balance conflicting needs for currency and stability by having archived versions, (viii) contributors need appropriate recognition, (ix) list content should be traceable, and (x) a global listing process needs both to encompass global diversity and to accommodate local knowledge of that diversity. We conclude by outlining issues that must be resolved if such a system of taxonomic list governance and a unified list of accepted scientific names generated are to be universally adopted.

No abstract

Aim Addressing global environmental challenges requires access to biodiversity data across wide spatial, temporal and taxonomic scales. Availability of such data has increased exponentially recently with the proliferation of biodiversity databases. However, heterogeneous coverage, protocols, and standards have hampered integration among these databases. To stimulate the next stage of data integration, here we present a synthesis of major databases, and investigate (a) how the coverage of databases varies across taxonomy, space, and record type; (b) what degree of integration is present among databases; (c) how integration of databases can increase biodiversity knowledge; and (d) the barriers to database integration. Location Global. Time period Contemporary. Major taxa studied Plants and vertebrates. Methods We reviewed 12 established biodiversity databases that mainly focus on geographic distributions and functional traits at global scale. We synthesized information from these databases to assess the status of their integration and major knowledge gaps and barriers to full integration. We estimated how improved integration can increase the data coverage for terrestrial plants and vertebrates. Results Every database reviewed had a unique focus of data coverage. Exchanges of biodiversity information were common among databases, although not always clearly documented. Functional trait databases were more isolated than those pertaining to species distributions. Variation and potential incompatibility of taxonomic systems used by different databases posed a major barrier to data integration. We found that integration of distribution databases could lead to increased taxonomic coverage that corresponds to 23 years’ advancement in data accumulation, and improvement in taxonomic coverage could be as high as 22.4% for trait databases. Main conclusions Rapid increases in biodiversity knowledge can be achieved through the integration of databases, providing the data necessary to address critical environmental challenges. Full integration across databases will require tackling the major impediments to data integration: taxonomic incompatibility, lags in data exchange, barriers to effective data synchronization, and isolation of individual initiatives.

No abstract

Aim: Addressing global environmental challenges requires access to biodiversity data across wide spatial, temporal and biological scales. Recent decades have witnessed an exponential increase of biodiversity information aggregated by biodiversity databases (hereafter ‘databases’). However, heterogeneous coverage, protocols, and standards of databases hampered the data integration among databases. To stimulate the next stage of data integration, here we present a synthesis of major databases, and investigate i) how the coverages of databases vary across taxonomy, space, and record type; ii) the degree of integration among databases; iii) how integration of databases can increase biodiversity knowledge; iv) the barriers to databases integration.Location: GlobalTime period: ContemporaryMajor taxa studied: Plants and VertebratesMethods: We reviewed the scope of twelve well-established databases and assessed the status of their integration. We synthesized information from these databases to assess major knowledge gaps and barriers to fully integration. We estimated how improved integration can increase the coverage and depth of biodiversity knowledge. Results: Each reviewed database had unique focus of data coverages. Data flows were common among databases, though not always clearly documented. Functional trait databases were more isolated than those pertaining to species distributions. Poor compatibility between taxonomic systems used by different databases posed a major challenge to integration. We demonstrated that integration of distribution databases can lead to greater taxonomic coverage that corresponds to 23 years’ advancement in knowledge accumulation, and improvement in taxonomic coverage could be as high as 22.4% for trait databases. Main conclusions: Rapid increase of biodiversity knowledge can be achieved through the integration of databases, providing the data necessary to address critical environmental challenges. Our synthesis provides an overview of the integration status of databases. Full integration across databases will require tackling the major impediments to data integration – taxonomic incompatibility, lags in data exchange, barriers to effective data synchronization, and isolation of individual initiatives.