Principles for creating a single authoritative list of the world’s species

Abstract

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.

World Flora Online: Placing taxonomists at the heart of a definitive and comprehensive global resource on the world's plants

“…If in the future WFO provides taxonomic data directly to GBIF to facilitate linkage of specimen or observation data with quality taxonomic information, Targets 2 and 5 (also 8) will become substantially more tractable. The WFO stands ready to provide data to the CoL and to contribute for implementing the vision of a single global unified list of species (Garnett & al., 2020) that is based on scientific rigor and broad community participation. For example, WFO is designed to be an important source for those compiling national biodiversity strategies, Red Lists and other biodiversity conservation policies and action plans thus benefiting a community in need of a globally credible resource.…”

In honor of John Bissett: authoritative guidelines on molecular identification of Trichoderma

“…Taxonomy, which is naming, classifying, and describing living organisms based on the similarity of their characteristics and evolutionary history, is not an exact science (Garnett et al 2020;Lücking et al 2020;Schoch et al 2020). Different groups of organisms are classified based on their specific characteristics and their role in the ecosystem (see below).…”

The Taxon Hypothesis Paradigm—On the Unambiguous Detection and Communication of Taxa

“…There are formal procedures for amending codes of nomenclature (either via commissions or voting at international congresses), and it is unlikely that introducing mandatory provisions related to taxonomy would be successful. Indeed, recent discussions on globally agreed name lists have adopted the principle of separating governance of validated lists of species from governance of the naming of species [54].…”