In defence of taxonomic governance

Recognizing species as a new focus of virus research

Species taxa are the units of taxonomy most suited to measure virus diversity, and they account for more than 70% of all virus taxa. Yet, as evidenced by the content of GenBank entries and illustrated by the recent literature on SARS-CoV-2, they are the most neglected taxa of virus research. To correct this disparity, we propose to make species taxa a first choice for communicating virus taxonomy in publications concerning viruses. We see it as a key step toward promoting research on diverse viruses, including pathogens, at this fundamental level of biology.

Testing repeatability, measurement error and species differentiation when using geometric morphometrics on complex shapes: a case study of Patagonian lizards of the genus Liolaemus (Squamata: Liolaemini)

The repeatability of findings is the key factor behind scientific reliability, and the failure to reproduce scientific findings has been termed the ‘replication crisis’. Geometric morphometrics is an established tool in evolutionary biology. However, different operators (and/or different methods) could act as large sources of variation in the data obtained. Here, we investigated inter-operator error in geometric morphometric protocols on complex shapes of Liolaemus lizards, as well as measurement error in three taxa varying in their difficulty of digitalization. We also examined the potential for these protocols to discriminate among complex shapes in closely related species. We found a wide range of inter-operator error, contributing between 19.5% and 60% to the total variation. Moreover, measurement error increased with the complexity of the quantified shape. All protocols were able to discriminate between species, but the use of more landmarks did not imply better performance. We present evidence that complex shapes reduce repeatability, highlighting the need to explore different sources of variation that could lead to such low repeatability. Lastly, we suggest some recommendations to improve the repeatability and reliability of geometric morphometrics results.

Taxonomy and conservation science: interdependent and value-laden

The relation between conservation science and taxonomy is typically seen as a simple dependency of the former on the latter. This dependency is assumed to be strictly one-way to avoid normative concerns from conservation science inappropriately affecting the descriptive discipline of taxonomy. In this paper, I argue against this widely assumed standard view on the relation between these two disciplines by highlighting two important roles for conservation scientists in scientific decisions that are part of the internal stages of taxonomy. I show that these roles imply that the two disciplines should be interdependent and that value-judgments should play a substantial role in both.