4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

The Web and the structure of taxonomy

Journal

SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY
Volume 56, Issue 6, Pages 943-955

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1080/10635150701777521

Keywords

taxonomy; Internet; e-science; Web revision

Funding

  1. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/C001532/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. NERC [NE/C001532/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An easily accessible taxonomic knowledge base is critically important for all biodiversity-related sciences. At present, taxonomic information is organized and regulated by a system of rules and conventions that date back to the introduction of binomial nomenclature by Linnaeus. The taxonomy of any particular group of organisms comprises the sum information in the taxonomic literature, supported by designated type specimens in major collections. In this article, the way modern means of disseminating information will change the practice of taxonomy, in particular the Internet, is explored. Basic taxonomic information, such as specimen-level data, location of types, and name catalogues are already available, at leas for some groups, on the Web. Specialist taxonomic databases, key-construction programs, and other software useful for systematists are also increasingly available. There has also been a move towards Web-publishing of taxonomic hypotheses, though as yet this is not fully permitted by the Codes of Nomenclature. A further and more radical move would be to transfer taxonomy completely to the Web. A possible model of this is discussed, as well as a pilot project, the CATE initiative, which seeks to explore the advantages and disadvantages of such a move. It is argued that taxonomy needs to forge better links with its user-communities to maintain its funding base, and that an important part of this is making the products of its research more accessible through the Internet.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available