Towards integrative taxonomy

Delineating species boundaries correctly is crucial to the discovery of life’s diversity because it determines whether or not different individual organisms are members of the same entity. The gap in communication between the different disciplines currently involved in delimiting species is an important and overlooked problem in the so-called ‘taxonomy crisis’. To solve this problem, it is suggested that taxonomy become integrative, and this integration is seen as the real challenge for the future of taxonomy. ‘Integrative taxonomy’ is defined as the science that aims to delimit the units of life’s diversity from multiple and complementary perspectives (phylogeography, comparative morphology, population genetics, ecology, development, behaviour, etc.). Some workers have already collaborated and successfully adopted an integrative approach to taxonomy. However, it is now time for the whole discipline to evolve. A radical change in mentality is needed concerning the creation of names in order to achieve this integration and to prevent the over-abundance of both synonyms and names of doubtful application from worsening. Integrative taxonomy gives priority to species delineation over the creation of new species names. Furthermore, it is emphasized that describing morphological diversity, referred to as ‘morphodiversity’, does not require the naming of any single set of specimens. Seven guidelines are proposed to help integrative taxonomists recognize cases when species are supported by broad biological evidence and therefore are deserving of an official name. © 2005 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society , 2005, 85 , 407‐415. ADDITIONAL KEYWORDS: biodiversity ‐ character variation ‐ DNA barcoding ‐ ecology ‐ morphodiversity ‐ phylogenetics ‐ phylogeography ‐ population biology ‐ species delineation ‐ systematics.

[1]  M. Ghiselin Taxonomy as the Organization of Knowledge , 2005 .

[2]  K. Queiroz**,et al.  A unified concept of species and its consequences for the future of taxonomy , 2005 .

[3]  A. Malhotra,et al.  Maximizing information in systematic revisions: a combined molecular and morphological analysis of a cryptic green pitviper complex (Trimeresurus stejnegeri) , 2004 .

[4]  B. Finlay Protist taxonomy: an ecological perspective. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[5]  M. O'Neill,et al.  Automated species identification: why not? , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[6]  E. Wilson Taxonomy as a fundamental discipline. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[7]  A. Oren Prokaryote diversity and taxonomy: current status and future challenges. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[8]  M. Blaxter The promise of a DNA taxonomy. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[9]  K. Will,et al.  Myth of the molecule: DNA barcodes for species cannot replace morphology for identification and classification , 2004, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[10]  P. Raven,et al.  Taxonomy: Impediment or Expedient? , 2004, Science.

[11]  C. Meyer TOWARD COMPREHENSIVENESS: INCREASED MOLECULAR SAMPLING WITHIN CYPRAEIDAE AND ITS PHYLOGENETIC IMPLICATIONS , 2004 .

[12]  S. Steppan,et al.  Molecular phylogeny of the endemic Philippine rodent Apomys (Muridae) and the dynamics of diversification in an oceanic archipelago , 2003 .

[13]  Masayuki Oishi,et al.  A newly discovered species of living baleen whale , 2003, Nature.

[14]  S. Bunn,et al.  Cryptic species and morphological plasticity in long‐lived bivalves (Unionoida: Hyriidae) from inland Australia , 2003, Molecular ecology.

[15]  M. Stoeckle Taxonomy, DNA, and the Bar Code of Life , 2003 .

[16]  J. Sites,et al.  Delimiting species: a Renaissance issue in systematic biology , 2003 .

[17]  A. Wortley,et al.  The big machine and the much‐maligned taxonomist DNA taxonomy and the web , 2003 .

[18]  C. Meyer Molecular systematics of cowries (Gastropoda: Cypraeidae) and diversification patterns in the tropics , 2003 .

[19]  P. Wood,et al.  The blind leading the blind: cryptic subterranean species and DNA taxonomy , 2003 .

[20]  S. Lavery,et al.  www.DNA-surveillance: applied molecular taxonomy for species conservation and discovery , 2003 .

[21]  R. Vane-Wright,et al.  Indifferent Philosophy versus Almighty Authority: On consistency, consensus and unitary taxonomy , 2003 .

[22]  A. Fall,et al.  Morphology Is Not a Reliable Tool for Delineating Species Within Cryptosporidium , 2003, The Journal of parasitology.

[23]  C. Louis,et al.  Mitochondrial DNA phylogeny and morphological diversity in the genus Mastus (Beck, 1837): a study in a recent (Holocene) island group (Koufonisi, south-east Crete) , 2003 .

[24]  T. Marcussen Evolution, phylogeography, and taxonomy within the Violaalba complex (Violaceae) , 2003, Plant Systematics and Evolution.

[25]  N. Platnick,et al.  The intellectual content of taxonomy: a comment on DNA taxonomy , 2003 .

[26]  C. Humphries,et al.  Shortcuts in systematics? A commentary on DNA-based taxonomy , 2003 .

[27]  D. Tautz,et al.  A plea for DNA taxonomy , 2003 .

[28]  E. Wilson The encyclopedia of life , 2003 .

[29]  James Mallet,et al.  Taxonomy: renaissance or Tower of Babel? , 2003 .

[30]  D. Wake,et al.  DISPERSAL OF VIVIPARITY ACROSS CONTACT ZONES IN IBERIAN POPULATIONS OF FIRE SALAMANDERS (SALAMANDRA) INFERRED FROM DISCORDANCE OF GENETIC AND MORPHOLOGICAL TRAITS , 2003, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[31]  V. Gewin Taxonomy: All living things, online , 2002, Nature.

[32]  H. Godfray Challenges for taxonomy , 2002, Nature.

[33]  W. Maddison,et al.  Sexual selection driving diversification in jumping spiders , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  B. Schaal,et al.  Plant population biology and systematics , 2001 .

[35]  M. Drotz,et al.  The species delimitation problem applied to the Agabus bipustulatus complex (Coleoptera, Dytiscidae) in north Scandinavia , 2001 .

[36]  H. Lessios,et al.  POPULATION STRUCTURE AND SPECIATION IN TROPICAL SEAS: GLOBAL PHYLOGEOGRAPHY OF THE SEA URCHIN DIADEMA , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[37]  A. J. Shaw,et al.  Phylogenetic relationships, morphological incongruence, and geographic speciation in the fontinalaceae (Bryophyta). , 2000, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[38]  J. Searle Phylogeography — The History and Formation of Species , 2000, Heredity.

[39]  S. Williams,et al.  Species boundaries in the starfish genus Linckia , 2000 .

[40]  J. Avise Phylogeography: The History and Formation of Species , 2000 .

[41]  S. Gofas,et al.  Genetic relationships between marine and marginal-marine populations of Cerithium species from the Mediterranean Sea , 1999 .

[42]  K. Queiroz The General Lineage Concept of Species and the Defining Properties of the Species Category , 1999 .

[43]  I. Oliver,et al.  Invertebrate Morphospecies as Surrogates for Species: A Case Study , 1996 .

[44]  C. Moritz Defining 'Evolutionarily Significant Units' for conservation. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[45]  John Alroy,et al.  Principles of genealogical concordance in species concepts and biological taxonomy , 1990 .

[46]  John McNeill,et al.  International Code of Botanical Nomenclature , 1983 .

[47]  Joseph Felsenstein,et al.  Alternative Methods of Phylogenetic Inference and their Interrelationship , 1979 .

[48]  A. Mcintosh,et al.  The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature , 1962, Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom.

[49]  Gareth Nelson,et al.  “Cladism” as a Philosophy of Classification , 1971 .

[50]  C. W. Stiles International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature , 1978, Nature.

[51]  B. Gardiner,et al.  Linnean Society of London , 1956, Nature.

[52]  A. Cain Animal species and their evolution , 1954 .

[53]  E. Mayr,et al.  Methods and Principles of Systematic Zoology , 1953 .

[54]  C. W. Stiles,et al.  International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature , 1916, Nature.

[55]  F. A. BATHER,et al.  International Code of Zoological Nomenclature , 1926, Nature.