On the notions of taxonomic ‘impediment’, ‘gap’, ‘inflation’ and ‘anarchy’, and their effects on the field of conservation

References

• Agnarsson, I., & Kuntner, M. (2007). Taxonomy in a changing world: Seeking solutions for a science in crisis. Systematic Biology, 56, 531–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701424546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azevedo, F., Cóndor-Luján, B., Willenz, P., Hajdu, E., Hooker, Y., & Klautau, M. (2015). Integrative taxonomy of calcareous sponges (subclass Calcinea) from the Peruvian coast: Morphology, molecules, and biogeography. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 173, 787–817. https://doi.org/10.1111/zoj.12213
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azevedo-Santos, V. M., Fearnside,P. M., Oliveira, C. S., Padial, A. A., Pelicice, F. M., Lima Jr, D. P., Simberloff, D., Lovejoy, T. E., Magalhães, A. L. B., Orsi,M. L., Agostinho, A. A., Esteves, F. A., Pompeu, P. S., Laurance, W. F., Petrere Jr, M., Mormul, R. P., & Vitule J. R. S. (2017). Removing the abyss between conservation science and policy decisions in Brazil. Biodiversity Conservation, 6, 1745–1752.
   Google Scholar
• Barrowclough, G. F., Cracraft, J., Klicka, J., & Zink, R. M. (2016). How many kinds of birds are there and why does it matter? Public Library of Science One, 11, e0166307. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166307
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, R. D., & Baker, R. J. (2001). A test of the genetic species concept: Cytochrome b sequences and mammals. Journal of Mammalogy, 82, 960–973. https://doi.org/10.1644/1545-1542(2001)082<0960:ATOTGS>2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso, P., Erwin, T. L., Borges, P. A. V., & New, T. R. (2011). The seven impediments in invertebrate conservation and how to overcome them. Biological Conservation, 144, 2647–2655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.07.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carvalho, D. C., Neto, D. A., Brasil, B. S., & Oliveira, D. A. (2011). DNA barcoding unveils a high rate of mislabeling in a commercial freshwater catfish from Brazil. Mitochondrial DNA, 22, 97–105. https://doi.org/10.3109/19401736.2011.588219
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceballos, G., & Ehrlich, P. R. (2009). Discoveries of new mammal species and their implications for conservation and ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106, 3841–3846. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0812419106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collar, N. J. (2013). A species is whatever I say it is. British Birds, 106, 130–142.
   Google Scholar
• Collar, N. J. (2018). Taxonomy as tyranny. Ibis, 160, 481–484. https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.12569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collar, N. J., Fishpool, L. D. C., del Hoyo, J., Pilgrim, J. D., Seddon, N., Spottiswoode, C. N., & Tobias, J. A. (2016). Toward a scoring system for species delimitation: A response to Remsen. Journal of Field Ornithology, 87, 104–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofo.12141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colwell, R. K., & Coddington, J. A. (1994). Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 345, 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1994.0091
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotterill, F. P., Groves, C. P., & Taylor, P. J. (2017). Taxonomy: Refine rather than stabilize. Nature, 547, 162. https://doi.org/10.1038/547162d
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotterill, F. P. D., Taylor, P. J., Gippoliti, S., Bishop, J. M., & Groves, C. P. (2014). Why one century of phenetics is enough: Response to “Are there really twice as many bovid species as we thought?” Systematic Biology, 63, 819–832. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daly-Engel, T. S., Baremore, I. E., Dean Grubbs, R., Gulak, S. J. B., Graham, R. T., & Enzenauer, M. P. (2018). Resurrection of the sixgill shark Hexanchus vitulus Springer & Waller, 1969 (Hexanchiformes, Hexanchidae), with comments on its distribution in the northwest Atlantic Ocean. Marine Biodiversity, 49, 759–768.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daugherty, C. H., Cree, A., Hay, J. M., & Thompson, M. B. (1990). Neglected taxonomy and continuing extinctions of tuatara Sphenodon. Nature, 347, 177–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dayrat, B. (2005). Toward integrative taxonomy. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 85, 407–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2005.00503.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Carvalho, M. R., Bockmann, F. A., Amorim, D. S., Brandão, C. R. F., de Vivo, M., de Figueiredo, J. L., Britski, H. A., de Pinna, M. C. C., Menezes, N. A., Marques, F. P. L., Papavero, N., Cancello, E. M., Crisci, J. V., McEachran, J. D., Schelly, R. C., Lundberg, J. G., Gill, A. C., Britz, R., Wheeler, Q. D., … Nelson, G. J. (2007). Taxonomic impediment or impediment to taxonomy? A commentary on systematics and the cybertaxonomic-automation paradigm. Evolutionary Biology, 34, 140–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-007-9011-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Carvalho, M. R., Ebach, M. C., Williams, D. M., Nihei, S. S., Trefaut Rodrigues, M., Grant, T., Silveira, L. F., Zaher, H., Gill, A. C., Schelly, R. C., Sparks, J. S., Bockmann, F. A., Séret, B., Ho, H.-C., Grande, L., Rieppel, O., Dubois, A., Ohler, A., Faivovich, J., … Nelson, G. (2014). Does counting species count as taxonomy? On misrepresenting systematics, yet again. Cladistics, 30, 322–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Queiroz, K. (2007). Species concepts and species delimitation. Systematic Biology, 56, 879–886. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701701083
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• del Hoyo, J., & Collar, N. J. (Eds.). (2014). HBW and BirdLife International illustrated checklist of the birds of the world volume 1: Non-passerines. Lynx Edicions.
   Google Scholar
• del Hoyo, J., & Collar, N. J. (2016). HBW and BirdLife International illustrated checklist of the birds of the world volume 2: Passerines. Lynx Edicions.
   Google Scholar
• del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., & Christie, D. A. (2013). Handbook of the birds of the world. Special volume: New species and global index. Lynx Edicions.
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson, E. C., & Christidis, L. (Eds.). (2014). The Howard and Moore complete checklist of the birds of the world. Volume 2. Passerines (4th ed.). Aves Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson, E. C., & Remsen Jr, J. V. (Eds.). (2013). The Howard and Moore Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World. Volume 1. Non-passerines (4th ed.). Aves Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dijkstra, K. D. B. (2017). Taxonomy: Use the red list as a registry. Nature, 546, 599–600. https://doi.org/10.1038/546599d
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diniz-Filho, J. A. F., Loyola, R. D., Raia, P., Mooers, A. O., & Bini, L. M. (2013). Darwinian shortfalls in biodiversity conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28, 689–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.09.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dominguez, E., & Wheeler, Q. D. (1997). Forum: Taxonomic stability is ignorance. Cladistics, 13, 367–372.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donegan, T. M. (2018). What is a species? A new universal method to measure differentiation and assess the taxonomic rank of allopatric populations, using continuous variables. ZooKeys, 757, 1–67. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.757.10965
   Google Scholar
• Donegan, T. M. (2019). On conflicts of interest, bias and deviations from the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature in a taxonomic committee, the South American Classification Committee of the American Ornithologists' Society: An analysis of previous cases, with recommendations for reform. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35777.51047
   Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2003). The relationships between taxonomy and conservation biology in the century of extinctions. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 326, S9–S21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1631-0691(03)00022-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2005). Proposed rules for the incorporation of nomina of higher-ranked zoological taxa in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 1. Some general questions, concepts and terms of biological nomenclature. Zoosystema, 27, 365–426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2006). New proposals for naming lower-ranked taxa within the frame of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 329, 823–840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2006.07.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2007). Phylogeny, taxonomy and nomenclature: The problem of taxonomic categories and of nomenclatural ranks. Zootaxa, 1519, 27–28. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1519.1.3
   Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2008). A partial but radical solution to the problem of nomenclatural taxonomic inflation and synonymy load. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 93, 857–863. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00900.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2010a). Species and “strange species” in zoology: Do we need a “unified concept of species? Comptes Rendus Palevol, 10, 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crpv.2011.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubois, A. (2010b). Zoological nomenclature in the century of extinctions: Priority vs. usage. Organisms Diversity & Evolution, 10, 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-010-0021-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evenhuis, N. L. (2007). Helping solve the “other” taxonomic impediment: Completing the eight steps to total enlightenment and taxonomic nirvana. Zootaxa, 1407, 67–68.
   Google Scholar
• Fennessy, J., Bidon, T., Reuss, F., Kumar, V., Elkan, P., Nilsson, M. A., Vamberger, M., Fritz, U., & Janke, A. (2016). Multi-locus analyses reveal four giraffe species instead of one. Current Biology, 26, 2543–2549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.07.036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feulner, P. G. D., Kirschbaum, F., Schugardt, C., Ketmaier, V., & Tiedemann, R. (2006). Electrophysiological and molecular genetic evidence for sympatrically occurring cryptic species in African weakly electric fishes (Teleostei: Mormyridae: Campylomormyrus). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 39, 198–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2005.09.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fogelin, R. (Ed.). (2003). Walking the tightrope of reason. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frankham, R., Ballou, J. D., Dudash, M. R., Eldridge, M. D. B., Fenster, C. B., Lacy, R. C., Mendelson, J. R., Porton, I. J., Ralls, K., & Ryder, O. A. (2012). Implications of different species concepts for conserving biodiversity. Biological Conservation, 153, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.04.034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, D. J., & Bernatchez, L. (2001). Adaptive evolutionary conservation: Towards a unified concept for defining conservation units. Molecular Ecology, 10, 2741–2752. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.t01-1-01411.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fricke, R., Eschmeyer, W. N., & Fong, J. D. (2019). Species by family/subfamily. http://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/SpeciesByFamily.asp
   Google Scholar
• Fujita, M. K., Leaché, A. D., Burbrink, F. T., McGuire, J. A., & Moritz, C. (2012). Coalescent-based species delimitation in an integrative taxonomy. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27, 480–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.04.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaffney, E. S. (1975). A phylogeny and classification of higher categories of turtles. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 155, 387–436.
   Google Scholar
• Garnett, S. T., & Christidis, L. (2017). Taxonomy anarchy hampers conservation. Nature, 546, 25–27. https://doi.org/10.1038/546025a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garnett, S. T., Christidis, L., Conix, S., Costello, M. J., Zachos, F. E., Bánki, O. S., Bao, Y., Barik, S. K., Buckeridge, J. S., Hobern, D., Lien, A., Montgomery, N., Nikolaeva, S., Pyle, R. L., Thomson, S. A., van Dijk, P. P., Whalen, A., Zhang, Z.-Q., & Thiele, K. R. (2020). Principles for creating a single authoritative list of the world’s species. Public Library of Science Biology, 18, e3000736 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000736
   Google Scholar
• Gippoliti, S. (2020). Everything mammal conservation biologists always wanted to know about taxonomy (but were afraid to ask). Journal for Nature Conservation, 54, 125793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2020.125793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gippoliti, S., & Groves, C. P. (2012). “Taxonomic inflation” in the historical context of mammalogy and conservation. Hystrix, 23, 6–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Oreja, J. A. (2008). The encyclopedia of life vs. the brochure of life: Exploring the relationships between the extinction of species and the inventory of life on Earth. Zootaxa, 1965, 61–68. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1965.1.3
   Google Scholar
• Grace, M. A., Doosey, M. H., Denton, J. S. S., Naylor, G. J. P.,Bart, Jr., H. L., & Maisey, J. G. (2019). A new Western North Atlantic Ocean kitefin shark (Squaliformes: Dalatiidae) from the Gulf of Mexico. Zootaxa, 4619, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4619.1.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groves, C. (2013). The nature of species: A rejoinder to Zachos et al. Mammalian Biology, 78, 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2012.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groves, C., & Grubb, P. (Eds.). (2011). Ungulate taxonomy. Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hebert, P. D., Ratnasingham, S., & De Waard, J. R. (2003). Barcoding animal life: Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 270, S96–S99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hebert, P. D. N., Penton, E. H., Burns, J. M., Janzen, D. H., & Hallwachs, W. (2004a). Ten species in one: DNA barcoding reveals cryptic species in the Neotropical skipper butterfly Astraptes fulgerator. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 14812–14817. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0406166101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hebert, P. D. N., Stoeckle, M. Y., Zemlak, T. S., & Francis, C. M. (2004b). Identification of birds through COI DNA barcodes. Public Library of Science Biology, 2, e312. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020312
   Google Scholar
• Heller, R., Frandsen, P., Lorenzen, E. D., & Siegismund, H. R. (2013). Are there really twice as many bovid species as we thought? Systematic Biology, 62, 490–493. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syt004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heller, R., Frandsen, P., Lorenzen, E. D., & Siegismund, H. R. (2014). Is diagnosability an indicator of speciation? Response to “Why one century of phenetics is enough. Systematic Biology, 63, 833–837. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennig, W. (1950). Grundzüge einer Theorie der phylogenetischen Systematik [Main features on the theory of phylogenetic systematics]. Deutscher Zentralverlag.
   Google Scholar
• Hollingsworth, P. M. (2017). Taxonomy: Avoid extra bureaucracy. Nature, 546, 600 https://doi.org/10.1038/546600a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holstein, N., & Luebert, F. (2017). Taxonomy: Stable taxon boundaries. Nature, 548, 158 https://doi.org/10.1038/548158d
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hortal, J., & Lobo, J. M. (2005). An ED-based protocol for optimal sampling of biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 2913–2947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0224-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaac, N. J., Mallet, J., & Mace, G. M. (2004). Taxonomic inflation: Its influence on macroecology and conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19, 464–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.06.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jetz, W., McPherson, J. M., & Guralnick, R. P. (2012). Integrating biodiversity distribution knowledge: Toward a global map of life. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27, 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.09.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jetz, W., Thomas, G. H., Joy, J. B., Redding, D. W., Hartmann, K., & Mooers, A. O. (2014). Global distribution and conservation of evolutionary distinctness in birds. Current Biology, 24, 919–930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.03.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambertz, M. (2017). Taxonomy: Retain scientific autonomy. Nature, 546, 600 https://doi.org/10.1038/546600b
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lecourt, D. (Ed.). (2001). La Philosophie des Sciences [The philosophy of science]. Presses Universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Mace, G. (2004). The role of taxonomy in species conservation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359, 711–719. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1454
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayr, E. (Ed.). (1982). The growth of biological thought. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miranda, F. R., Casali, D. M., Perini, F. A., Machado, F. A., & Santos, F. R. (2018). Taxonomic review of the genus Cyclopes Gray, 1821 (Xenarthra: Pilosa), with the revalidation and description of new species. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 183, 687–721. https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlx079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mora, C., Rollo, A., & Tittensor, D. P. (2013). Comment on “Can we name Earth’s species before they go extinct?” Science, 340, 237.
   Google Scholar
• Mora, C., Tittensor, D. P., Adl, S., Simpson, A. G., & Worm, B. (2011). How many species are there on Earth and in the ocean? Public Library of Science Biology, 9, e1001127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001127
   Google Scholar
• Morin, P. A., Scott Baker, C., Brewer, R. S., Burdin, A. M., Dalebout, M. L., Dines, J. P., Fedutin, I., Filatova, O., Hoyt, E., Jung, J.-L., Lauf, M., Potter, C. W., Richard, G., Ridgway, M., Robertson, K. M., & Wade, P. R. (2017). Genetic structure of the beaked whale genus Berardius in the North Pacific, with genetic evidence for a new species. Marine Mammal Science, 33, 96–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/mms.12345
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moritz, C. (1994). Defining ‘evolutionarily significant units’ for conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 9, 373–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(94)90057-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padial, J. M., Castroviejo-Fisher, S., Köhler, J., Vilà, C., Chaparro, J. C., & De la Riva, I. (2009). Deciphering the products of evolution at the species level: The need for an integrative taxonomy. Zoologica Scripta, 38, 431–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-6409.2008.00381.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padial, J. M., & De la Riva, I. (2006). Taxonomic inflation and the stability of species lists: The perils of Ostrich’s behavior. Systematic Biology, 55, 859–867. https://doi.org/10.1080/1063515060081588
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Padial, J. M., Miralles, A., De La Riva, I., & Vences, M. (2010). The integrative future of taxonomy. Frontiers in Zoology, 7, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-7-16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira, L. H., Hanner, R., Foresti, F., & Oliveira, C. (2013). Can DNA barcoding accurately discriminate megadiverse Neotropical freshwater fish fauna? BioMedCentral Genetics, 14, 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-14-20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira, L. H. G., Maia, G. M. G., Hanner, R., Foresti, F., & Oliveira, C. (2011a). DNA barcodes discriminate freshwater fishes from the Paraíba do Sul River Basin, São Paulo, Brazil. Mitochondrial DNA, 22, 71–79. https://doi.org/10.3109/19401736.2010.532213
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira, L. H. G., Pazian, M. F., Hanner, R., Foresti, F., & Oliveira, C. (2011b). DNA barcoding reveals hidden diversity in the Neotropical freshwater fish Piabina argentea (Characiformes: Characidae) from the Upper Paraná basin of Brazil. Mitochondrial DNA, 22, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.3109/19401736.2011.588213
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, A. T. (2006). Uses and requirements of ecological niche models and related distributional models. Biodiversity Informatics, 3, 59–72. https://doi.org/10.17161/bi.v3i0.29
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, A. T., & Navarro-Sigüenza, A. G. (1999). Alternate species concepts as bases for determining priority conservation areas. Conservation Biology, 13, 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.013002427.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineda, E., & Lobo, J. M. (2012). The performance of range maps and species distribution models representing the geographic variation of species richness at different resolutions. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 21, 935–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00741.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinheiro, H. T., Moreau, C. S., Daly, M., & Rocha, L. A. (2019). Will DNA barcoding meet taxonomic needs? Science (New York, N.Y.), 365, 873–874. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay7174
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pleijel, F., & Rouse, G. W. (2000). Least-inclusive taxonomic unit: A new taxonomic concept for biology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 267, 627–630. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1048
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prata, E. M. B., Sass, C., Rodrigues, D. P., Domingos, F. M. C. B., Specht, C. D., Damasco, G., Ribas, C. C., Fine, P. V. A., & Vicentini, A. (2018). Towards integrative taxonomy in Neotropical botany: Disentangling the Pagamea guianensis species complex (Rubiaceae). Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 188, 213–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/botlinnean/boy051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pugedo, M. L., Andrade Neto, F. R., Pessali, T. C., Birindelli, J. L. O., & Carvalho, D. C. (2016). Integrative taxonomy supports new candidate fish species in a poorly studied Neotropical region: The Jequitinhonha River Basin. Genetica, 144, 341–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-016-9903-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rannala, B. (2015). The art and science of species delimitation. Current Biology, 61, 846–853.
   Google Scholar
• Raposo, M. A., Stopiglia, R., Brito, G. R. R., Bockmann, F. A., Kirwan, G. M., Gayon, J., & Dubois, A. (2017). What really hampers taxonomy and conservation? A riposte to Garnett and Christidis. Zootaxa, 4317, 179–184. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4317.1.10
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remsen, J. V. (2015). [Review of] HBW. BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Non-passerines (N. J. Collar & J. Del Hoyo, eds.), vol. 1. Journal of Field Ornithology, 82, 182–187.
   Google Scholar
• Remsen, J. V. (2016). A “rapid assessment program” for assigning species rank? Journal of Field Ornithology, 87, 110–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofo.12142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reydon, T. A. (2005). On the nature of the species problem and the four meanings of ‘species’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36, 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2004.12.004
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Riedel, S., Yao, L., McCallum, A., & Marlin, B. M. (2013, June). Relation extraction with matrix factorization and universal schemas. In L. Vanderwende, H. Daumé III, & K. Kirchhoff (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2013 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (pp. 74–84).
   Google Scholar
• Rodman, J. E., & Cody, J. H. (2003). The taxonomic impediment overcome: NSF’s partnerships for enhancing expertise in taxonomy (PEET) as a model. Systematic Biology, 52, 428–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150309326
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sangster, G., & Luksenburg, A. J. (2015). Declining rates of species described per taxonomist: Slowdown of progress or a side-effect of improved quality in taxonomy? Systematic Biology, 64, 144–151. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu069
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheffers, B. R., Joppa, L. N., Pimm, S. L., & Laurance, W. F. (2012). What we know and don’t know about Earth’s missing biodiversity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27, 501–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.05.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schipper, J., Chanson, J. S., Chiozza, F., Cox, N. A., Hoffmann, M., Katariya, V., Lamoreux, J., Rodrigues, A. S. L., Stuart, S. N., Temple, H. J., Baillie, J., Boitani, L., Lacher, T. E., Mittermeier, R. A., Smith, A. T., Absolon, D., Aguiar, J. M., Amori, G., Bakkour, N., … Young, B. E. (2008). The status of the world’s land and marine mammals: Diversity, threat, and knowledge. Science, 322, 225–230. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soulé, M. E. (1985). What is conservation biology? BioScience, 35, 727–734.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stattersfield, A. J., Crosby, M. J., Long, A. J., & Wege, D. C. (Eds.). (1998). Endemic Bird Areas of the world. Priorities for biodiversity conservation. BirdLife International.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, D. J. (2013b). Re-description of Arapaima agassizii (Valenciennes), a rare fish from Brazil (Osteoglossomorpha: Osteoglossidae). Copeia, 2013, 38–51. https://doi.org/10.1643/CI-12-013
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, D. J. (2013a). A new species of Arapaima (Osteoglossomorpha: Osteoglossidae) from the Solimões River, Amazonas State, Brazil. Copeia, 2013, 470–476. https://doi.org/10.1643/CI-12-017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuart, B. L., Inger, R. F., & Voris, H. K. (2006). High level of cryptic species diversity revealed by sympatric lineages of Southeast Asian forest frogs. Biology Letters, 2, 470–474. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2006.0505
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sukumaran, J., & Knowles, L. L. (2017). Multispecies coalescent delimits structure, not species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114, 1607–1612. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607921114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takeda, H. (2017). Taxonomy: The IUBS responds. Nature, 546, 600. https://doi.org/10.1038/546600d
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson, S. A., Pyle, R. L., Ahyong, S. T., Alonso-Zarazaga, M., Ammirati, J., Araya, J. F., Ascher, J. S., Audisio, T. L., Azevedo-Santos, V. M., Bailly, N., Baker, W. J., Balke, M., Barclay, M. V. L., Barrett, R. L., Benine, R. C., Bickerstaff, J. R. M., Bouchard, P., Bour, R., Bourgoin, T., … Zhou, H.-Z. (2018). Taxonomy based on science is necessary for global conservation. Public Library of Science Biology, 16, e2005075. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2005075
   Google Scholar
• Tobias, J. A., Seddon, N., Spottiswoode, C. N., Pilgrim, J. D., Fishpool, L. D. C., & Collar, N. J. (2010). Quantitative criteria for species delimitation. Ibis, 152, 724–746. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2010.01051.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valbuena-Urenã, E., Amat, F., & Carranza, S. (2013). Integrative phylogeography of Calotriton newts (Amphibia, Salamandridae), with special remarks on the conservation of the Endangered Montseny Brook Newt (Calotriton arnoldi). Public Library of Science One, 8, e62542. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062542
   Google Scholar
• Vences, M., Thomas, M., Bonett, R. M., & Vieites, D. R. (2005). Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNA barcoding: Chances and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360, 1859–1868. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1717
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vitt, L. J., & Caldwell, J. P. (Eds.). (2013). Herpetology. An introductory biology of amphibians and reptiles (4th ed.). Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Ward, R. D., Hanner, R., & Hebert, P. D. (2009). The campaign to DNA barcode all fishes, FISH-BOL. Journal of Fish Biology, 74, 329–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2008.02080.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeler, Q. D. (2004). Taxonomic triage and the poverty of phylogeny. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 359, 571–583. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeler, Q. D., Raven, P., & Wilson, E. O. (2004). Taxonomy: Impediment or expedient? Science (New York, N.Y.), 303, 285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.303.5656.285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitney, B. M., & Cohn-Haft, M. (2013). Original scientific descriptions. In J. del Hoyo, A. Elliott, J. Sargatal, & D. A. Christie (Eds.). Handbook of the birds of the world. Special volume: New species and global index (pp. 225–239). Lynx Edicions.
   Google Scholar
• Whittaker, R. J., Araújo, M. B., Jepson, P., Ladle, R. J., Watson, J. E. M., & Willis, K. J. (2005). Conservation biogeography: Assessment and prospect. Diversity and Distributions, 11, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00143.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Will, K. W., Mishler, B. D., & Wheeler, Q. D. (2005). The perils of DNA barcoding and the need for integrative taxonomy. Systematic Biology, 54, 844–851. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150500354878
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, E. O. (2004). Taxonomy as a fundamental discipline. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359, 739. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1440
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witt, J. D. S., & Hebert, P. D. N. (2000). Cryptic species diversity and evolution in the amphipod genus Hyalella within central glaciated North America: A molecular phylogenetic approach. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 57, 687–698. https://doi.org/10.1139/f99-285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woinarski, J. C., Garnett, S. T., Legge, S. M., & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2017). The contribution of policy, law, management, research, and advocacy failings to the recent extinctions of three Australian vertebrate species. Conservation Biology, 31, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12852
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yahara, T., Donoghue, M., Zardoya, R., Faith, D. C., & Cracraft, J. (2010). Genetic diversity assessments in the century of genome science. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 43–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Z., & Rannala, B. (2010). Bayesian species delimitation using multilocus sequence data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 107, 9264–9269. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0913022107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zachos, F. E. (2013). Taxonomy: Species splitting puts conservation at risk. Nature, 494, 35. https://doi.org/10.1038/494035c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zachos, F. E. (2014). Paraphyly-again!? A plea against the dissociation of taxonomy and phylogenetics. Zootaxa, 3764, 594–596. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3764.5.8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zachos, F. E. (2018). Mammals and meaningful taxonomic units: The debate about species concepts and conservation. Mammal Review, 48, 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar