Parasitology, Harold W. Manter Laboratory of

 

Harold W. Manter Laboratory of Parasitology: Faculty Publications

Taxonomy Based on Science Is Necessary for Global Conservation [Formal comment]

Scott A. Thompson, Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo
Richard L. Pyle, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Hawaii
Neal L. Evenhuis, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Hawai‘i,
Scott Monks, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo
Ronald H. Pine, University of Kansas
Luis A. Ruedas, Portland State University
Jorge A. Salazar-Bravo, Texas Tech University
Robert M. Timm, University of Kansas
Dozens of others

Document Type Article

Copyright 2018, the authors. Used by permission. Open access material.

Abstract

Representative paragraph:

How does taxonomic instability affect conservation? Morrison et al. [21] “found that changes in taxonomy do not have consistent and predictable impacts on conservation”; they also found that “splitting taxa may tend to increase protection, and name changes may have the least effect where they concern charismatic organisms.” In African ungulates, Gippoliti et al. [22] describe cases where conservation management based on the Biological Species Concept overlooks evolutionarily significant units (recognized with the Phylogenetic Species Concept), with negative consequences. The splitting of legally protected taxa may result in species not being included by name in conservation legislation or regulations, thereby losing legal protection. However, well-crafted legislation includes mechanisms to extend protection despite taxonomic changes; initiatives such as Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) specialist groups already link taxonomy and its changes with conservation [23]. Garnett and Christidis assert that taxonomic instability negatively affects conservation. However, artificial stability arising from insufficient taxonomic work can be particularly detrimental to conservation, causing mistargeting of conservation funding by misrepresentation of population size and distribution with the flow-on effects to conservation status [11,24,25].