Improving Taxonomic Practices and Enhancing Its Extensibility-An Example from Araneology

Planetary extinction of biodiversity underscores the need for taxonomy. Here, we scrutinize spider taxonomy over the last decade (2008-2018), compiling 2083 published accounts of newly described species. We evaluated what type of data were used to delineate species, whether data were made freely available, whether an explicit species hypothesis was stated, what types of media were used, the sample sizes, and the degree to which species constructs were integrative. The findings we report reveal that taxonomy remains largely descriptive, not integrative, and provides no explicit conceptual framework. Less than 4% of accounts explicitly stated a species concept and over one-third of all new species described were based on 1-2 specimens or only one sex. Only ~5% of studies made data freely available, and only ~14% of all newly described species employed more than one line of evidence, with molecular data used in ~6% of the studies. These same trends have been discovered in other animal groups, and therefore we find it logical that taxonomists face an uphill challenge when justifying the scientific rigor of their field and securing the needed resources. To move taxonomy forward, we make recommendations that, if implemented, will enhance its rigor, repeatability, and scientific standards.

Automated summary

The study scrutinizes spider taxonomy over the last decade and reveals that taxonomy remains largely descriptive, lacking integration and explicit conceptual framework. Only a small percentage of accounts state a species concept, and many new species descriptions are based on limited specimens or genders. Only a few studies make data freely available, and a small percentage of newly described species employ multiple lines of evidence, with molecular data being rarely used. Similar trends have been observed in other animal groups, highlighting the challenges faced by taxonomists in justifying the rigor of their field and securing resources. Recommendations are made to enhance the rigor, repeatability, and scientific standards of taxonomy.