New and old tools in biodiversity exploration
I have already treated biodiversity in previous editorials, but I feel the urge to get back to it, from a different angle. In the last decade, many projects were aimed at answering the simple question “how many species are inhabiting the planet?” and they usually justified their huge funding with the number of descriptions of new species that they produced: many of these species are animals. Animal taxonomy, thus, should be a discipline that flourishes, due to the many projects dedicated to its exploration. Strangely enough, it is not; but this is valid just for traditional taxonomy. Genetic tools have been developed to recognize species (e.g. Scali Citation2009) and molecular tools are paramount, also exploring the variation that characterizes each species (e.g. Gentile et al. Citation2009). Giving names to new species, however, involves knowing all the species already ascribed to the genus the new taxon is referred to. These species might be many, and their descriptions might be hidden in obscure papers, and this makes taxonomy an eminently historical science, based on a thorough knowledge of taxonomic literature (the zoological one started in 1758). Rota et al. (Citation2008) is a good example of how the history of taxa is to be reconstructed, so to arrive at a description of a new species. The Italian Journal of Zoology is very keen to publish traditional descriptions of new taxa (e.g. Bo et al. Citation2009; Szunpar Citation2009) and catalogues of biodiversity (e.g. Christoffersen Citation2008). We encourage the merging of new tools (like the barcoding technique) with the old ones (traditional taxonomy, based on literature and morphology), whereas it is often the case that the two progress in separation, with a recent tendency to favour the first at the expense of the second. This tendency is leading traditional taxonomy to rapidly disappear from the scientific community, but this unbalance will be of no advantage for “modern” taxonomy: we will know that some specimens can be referred to “new” species but, without traditional taxonomy, we will not have a way to name them correctly. The projects based on information and technology approaches, furthermore, make available enormous amounts of information through the internet, but this information is often based on poor knowledge. Traditional taxonomists must stop working for free for big projects that are founded on their expertise without paying for it. This generous attitude is leading them to extinction.
Ferdinando Boero
Editor-in-Chief
References
- Bo , M , Barucca , M , Biscotti , M , Canapa , A , Lapian , HFN , Olmo , E and Bavestrello , G. 2009 . Description of Pseudorirrhipathes (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Exacorallia: Anthipathidae), a new genus of whip black corals from the Indo-Pacific . Italian Journal of Zoology , 76 ( 4 ) : 392 – 402 .
- Christoffersen , ML. 2008 . A catalogue of the Ocnerodrilidae (Annelida, Oligochaeta) from South America . Italian Journal of Zoology , 75 ( 1 ) : 97 – 107 .
- Gentile , G , Vernesi , C , Vicario , S , Pecchioli , E , Caccone , A , Bertorelle , G and Sbordoni , V. 2009 . Mitochondrial DNA variation in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) from Italy: Evidence of admixture in one of the last C. c. italicus pure populations from central-southern Italy . Italian Journal of Zoology , 76 ( 1 ) : 16 – 27 .
- Rota , E , Matamoros , L and Erseus , C. 2008 . In search of Marionina (Clitellata, Enchytraeidae): A taxonomic history of the genus and re-description of the type species Pachydrilus georgianus Michaelsen, 1888 . Italian Journal of Zoology , 75 ( 4 ) : 417 – 436 .
- Scali , V. 2009 . Revision of the Iberian stick insect genus Leptynia Pantel and description of the new genus Pijnackeria . Italian Journal of Zoology , 76 ( 4 ) : 381 – 391 .
- Szunpar , G , Aloise , G and Filippucci , MG. 2009 . Suncus etruscus (Soricomorpha, Soricidae): A new species for Elba Island (Tuscan Archipelago, Italy) . Italian Journal of Zoology , 76 ( 1 ) : 143 – 143 .