BackgroundWe use taxonomy to organize the world into recognizable units. Folk taxonomy deals with the naming and classification of organisms through culture. Unlike its scientific counterpart, folk taxonomy is mostly undocumented, the Zoological Code of Nomenclature does not regulate it, and the resulting names are specific to each culture. A growing body of literature is steadily shedding light on the principles underlying this pre-scientific taxonomy. Vernacular names can be an instrument to increase participation of non-scientists in biodiversity matters. In South Africa, great strides have been made in standardizing and increasing relatability of vernacular amphibian names in English and Afrikaans. However, there is a need to achieve the same with the country’s autochthonous languages which are used by a majority of the population.MethodsThis study investigates amphibian-related folk taxonomy using a semi-structured interview process in KwaZulu-Natal’s Zululand region and pilots methods of applying folk taxonomy principles to compile a comprehensive list of standardized indigenous frog names.ResultsFolk taxonomy in Zululand is systematic, developed, and bears similarities to other indigenous taxonomies around the world. Similarities also exist between folk and scientific taxonomy. Six uninomial indigenous names were found to be used for the 58 amphibian species occurring in the study area. The 58 species were assigned individual indigenous names using folk taxonomy guidelines supplemented with guidelines for modern taxonomies.ConclusionsThere is a gap in the documentation and investigation of amphibian folk taxonomy in South Africa. Standardization of indigenous frog names is required to increase their universality. Similarities between folk and modern taxonomies allow for supplementation of indigenous guidelines when compiling a comprehensive indigenous species list. Through this study, social inclusion in wildlife matters is increased, indigenous knowledge systems are promoted, and a contribution is made to the development of an indigenous South African language.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13002-019-0294-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Taxonomic bias, resulting in some taxa receiving more attention than others, has been shown to persist throughout history. Such bias in primary biodiversity data needs to be addressed because the data are vital to environmental management. This study reviews taxonomic bias in South African primary biodiversity data obtained from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). The focus was specifically on animal classes, and regression analysis was used to assess the influence of scientific interest and cultural salience on taxonomic bias. A higher resolution analysis of the two explanatory variables’ influence on taxonomic bias is conducted using a generalised linear model on a subset of herpetofaunal families from the focal classes. Furthermore, the potential effects of cultural salience and scientific interest on a taxon’s extinction risk are investigated. The findings show that taxonomic bias in South Africa’s primary biodiversity data has similarities with global scale taxonomic bias. Among animal classes, there is strong bias towards birds while classes such as Polychaeta and Maxillopoda are under-represented. Cultural salience has a stronger influence on taxonomic bias than scientific interest. It is, however, unclear how these explanatory variables may influence the extinction risk of taxa. We recommend that taxonomic bias can be reduced if primary biodiversity data collection has a range of targets that guide (but do not limit) accumulation of species occurrence records per habitat. Within this range, a lower target of species occurrence records accommodates species that are difficult to detect. The upper target means occurrence records for any species are less urgent but nonetheless useful and thus data collection efforts can focus on species with fewer occurrence records.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.