Event Horizon

[Richard Zander]

This year (2003) is the 250th anniversary of Linnaeus' Species Plantarum
(1753). Soon, 2008 will bring us to the 250th anniversary of Linnaeus' 10th
ed. of Systema Naturae. These early dates are the starting dates for most
plant and animal nomenclature for purposes of priority.

In 250 years, we systematists have either discovered or mediated the
generation of billions of dollars in economic value and quality of life
enhancements. With the informational revolution, 250 years of discovery
provide a collection-based timeline demonstrating past environmental change
with clear value in dealing with present global crises in predicting future
change.

Over the past 250 years, we have agreed with Linnaeus that a central aim is
to discover and name the world's biota. Any number of additional purposes
informed through a multiplicity of perceived problems and methods to solve
them have been attached to the Linnaean endeavor. The central activity,
however, based on Linnaean nomenclature, has always been amply demonstrated
as economically valuable and supportive of human needs in the long term.

Most of us are aware of a sea-change in support for systematics. This
includes the dissolution or centralization of collections and
collections-based programs, and the general turn to education as the primary
function of institutions with systematic programs. This is happening even at
the Smithsonian (see recent issue of Plant Press.)

I appreciate that short-term fixes are needed for critical problems, such as
recent suggestions on Taxacom of how to tell a dean that it is a "mistake"
to shut down a program because it can't be recreated easily, especially if
the collections are dispersed; and the phenomenal message from NSF's Rodman
to University of Nebraska about killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

I have, however, detected an "after me the global oceanic rise" phenomenon
where the event horizon for present systematists is the end of the present
grant, or retirement at best. This leaves posterity with not only a smoking
and desolate Earth, but an empty ethic and no effective plan in place.

A 250-year plan might help. It would involve 10 generations (at 25 work
years each). I wonder what such a plan would look like, for the field in
general or for your institution in particular? Instead of going forward from
1 year plans to 3 year plans, or at the most 5 or 10 year plans, we could
work backward to 100 year plans and 50 year plans (four generations and two
generations).

If 250 years of discovery along Linnaean lines have been valuable for
humankind, and if many areas of the world and many groups of plants and
animals are yet poorly explored, should not another 250 years of similar
work be equally valuable? How might we plan that these years be spent, or
will we leave a legacy of anomie to the next 25 generations of students?

______________________
Richard H. Zander
Bryology Group
Missouri Botanical Garden
PO Box 299
St. Louis, MO 63166-0299
richard.zander at mobot.org
Voice: 314-577-5180
Websites:
http://ridgwaydb.mobot.org/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
http://ridgwaydb.mobot.org/resbot/index.htm