4.5 Article

Past and future species definitions for Bacteria and Archaea

期刊

SYSTEMATIC AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 38, 期 4, 页码 209-216

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2015.02.001

关键词

Species concept; Species definition; Genomics

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy [CGL2012-39627-C03-03]
  2. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) funds
  3. preparatory phase of the Microbial Resource Research Infrastructure (MIRRI) - EU [312251]
  4. competitive research groups (Microbiology) of the Government of the Balearic Islands
  5. FEDER funds
  6. Max Planck Society
  7. German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina for the working group Taxonomy in the age of - OMICS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Species is the basic unit of biological diversity. However, among the different microbiological disciplines there is an important degree of disagreement as to what this unit may be. In this minireview, we argue that the main point of disagreement is the definition (i.e. the way species are circumscribed by means of observable characters) rather than the concept (i.e. the idea of what a species may be as a unit of biodiversity, the meaning of the patterns of recurrence observed in nature, and the why of their existence). Taxonomists have defined species by means of genetic and expressed characters that ensure the members of the unit are monophyletic, and exhibit a large degree of genomic and phenotypic coherence. The new technologies allowing high-throughput data acquisition are expected to improve future classifications significantly and will lead to database-based taxonomy centered on portable and interactive data. Future species descriptions of Bacteria and Archaea should include a high quality genome sequence of at least the type strain as an obligatory requirement, just as today an almost full-length 16S rRNA gene sequence must be provided. Serious efforts are needed in order to re-evaluate the major guidelines for standard descriptions. (C) 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据