Taxonomy anarchy hampers conservation

We contend that the sc ient i f ic community’s failure to govern taxonomy threatens the effectiveness of global efforts to halt biodiversity loss, damages the credibility of science and is expensive to society. To address the problem, we propose that the governance of the taxonomy of complex organisms be brought under the purview of the International Union of Biological Sciences (IUBS). This is the umbrella body for biology within taxonomists that a species should represent a distinct evolutionary lineage. But there is none about how a lineage should be defined. ‘Species’ are often created or dismissed arbitrarily, according to the individual taxonomist’s adherence to one of at least 30 definitions. Crucially, there is no global oversight of taxonomic decisions — researchers can ‘split or lump’ species with no consideration of the consequences. The assumption that species are fixed entities underpins every international agreement on biodiversity conservation, all national environmental legislation and the efforts of many individuals and organizations to safeguard plants and animals. Yet for a discipline aiming to impose order on the natural world, taxonomy (the classification of complex organisms) is remarkably anarchic. There is reasonable agreement among Part of the vast ornithology collection at the American Museum of Natural History. G EO R G E ST EI N M ET Z/ N G C