Taxonomic inflation: its influence on macroecology and conservation

The reality of taxonomic change

“…We agree with Agapow and Sluys that phylogenetic species 'are not mere replicates' [1]. However, problems arise in lists containing a mixture of species concepts.…”

“…It is time to stop over-generalizing and to 'get over it' [15]. We agree broadly with many of the points raised by Agapow and Sluys [1]. Indeed, their response seems to have been triggered by observations similar to those that motivated our own article [2].…”

“…Indeed, there is a wider message that there are several anti-predatory strategies (such as crypsis through countershading or markings that deflect predators away from particularly vulnerable parts of the body of an animal) that have become staples of natural-history books and TV programmes, but that have been unjustly neglected by evolutionary ecologists. In their recent TREE paper [1], Isaac et al assert that species numbers are increasing rapidly owing to 'taxonomic inflation', where previously identified species are reclassified under new species concepts into smaller and more numerous new taxa. Using recent phylogenetic concepts (as opposed to classic concepts, notably the biological or isolation concept) will certainly lead to an apparent increase in species number [2][3][4].…”

Madagascar's Lemurs: Cryptic diversity or taxonomic inflation?

“…The same burgeoning of species names has occurred throughout the order Primates 3,4 and beyond, 5 provoking both concern and energetic debate. [6][7][8][9] Interestingly, this debate has largely unfolded among ecologists, conservationists, and other ''consumers'' of taxonomy; many ''producers'' seem to be content to generate new taxonomies with a remarkable lack of introspection, as if they were no more than passive consequences of more lofty concerns. And because the same causes underlie taxonomic inflation in Madagascar as elsewhere, this extraordinary island once again presents us with a microcosm of the larger world.…”

The Hunting of the SNaRC: A Snarky Solution to the Species Problem

“…This is sometimes called the phylogenetic species concept (PSC), although, as with monophyly, there are at least two contenders for the PSC label, one based on historical monophyly (Mishler and Theriot 2000), and one based on diagnostic characters (Wheeler and Platnick 2000). A major problem perceived by some for the PSC is that there is often monophyletic structure below "good species" that leads to potential taxonomic inflation, an explosion in the number of species that are described (Isaac, Mallet, et al 2004;Zachos and Lovari 2013). Likewise, it has been argued by some that the use of a phylogenetic conception based on monophyly could lead to excessive lumping (Staley 2006).…”