Taxacom: Fwd: Single official lists of taxa (sensu Doug Yanega many proposals to this list)

Tue Jul 4 16:04:22 CDT 2023

Hi Jose,

My comment about it being a massive waste of effort was about the gender
agreement part of the list. Someone, Doug it seems, needs to spend years
determining the genders of all the genus-group names - which could IMHO
have been better spent on doing other things. Global catalogues of names
are (of course) of vital importance and I am pleased to say that I have
been doing my bit! Not only did I create the Cockroach Species File
(synonymic catalogue of all 'true'' cockroaches - unfinished of course),
but I also created the Global Lepidoptera Names Index (LepIndex), which is
the nearest thing there is to a global list of Lepidoptera names (I hasten
to add that masses of work is still required by someone to turn LepIndex
into a synonymic catalogue and sort out all the errors).

Cheers,

George
****************************************************************************
*Dr George Beccaloni FLS*
*Director, Alfred Russel Wallace Correspondence Project*

Wallace Correspondence Project: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwallaceletters.myspecies.info%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z83GSG1gy9Tuc%2B4Pz8rXmujJG8XOidWeANMkzYct248%3D&reserved=0
Wallace Memorial Fund: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwallacefund.myspecies.info%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=f4HXRpDctk0mNa9uNaTip1tf4cJK47D6dgkEq47ecB8%3D&reserved=0
ResearchGate: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FGeorge-Beccaloni-2&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3hLkn1tmd5SVBm5wALl80tcvi92T7pYHQ%2FAttq8nazg%3D&reserved=0
****************************************************************************

On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 at 21:24, Jose Fernandez-Triana via Taxacom <
taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:

> Dear Tony,
>
> Thanks a lot for your comments about my message. Indeed what I was trying
> to bring to the attention of the group was not necessarily the gender
> agreement topic (which has been discussed extensively) but rather the angle
> of creating master checklists for different taxa. This would not only
> render the gender agreement topic irrelevant (as Doug has already mentioned
> in his latest emails) but also, and most importantly, it would provide
> other benefits that go beyond dealing with gender agreements, such as
> having a single list with all names (synonyms, homonyms, etc.), accounting
> for all species of a taxon, species distribution, etc. In that sense it
> would not be "a monumental waste of time and effort" as George considered
> it would be in his reply to my email.
>
> But indeed what I wrote about has been done before and Tony points out many
> good examples of that (and certainly more could be mentioned). I emphasized
> doing so from a bottom to top approach instead of the (I think most common)
> top to bottom way, as perhaps that would be more practical.
>
> Tony wrote: "The coordination of activities in that respect would appear to
> me to be the area that would benefit most from additional work that is not
> presently being undertaken". And I totally agree with his assessment.
> Again, perhaps because I am too naive (or perhaps I am too prone to embark
> into monumental waste of time and effort enterprises? ;-)  I was
> considering the possibility of mobilizing the wider community to work
> together in their respective taxon groups and produce those lists. The only
> "novelty" I could claim from my previous email is to make those lists as
> published paper (or papers) first, so that the authors implied in those
> efforts get the recognition they deserve (and are also encouraged to work
> towards those goals). And the idea of encouraging scientific societies to
> somehow organize the work to be done... instead of relying on the admirable
> enthusiasm and hard work of a few fellows.
>
> Cheers,
> Jose
>
> --
> José L. Fernández-Triana, Ph.D.
> Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
> Canadian National Collection of Insects (CNC)
> 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0C6, CANADA
> Phone: 613-759-1034. Email: jose.fernandez at agr.gc.ca
> Alternative email: cnc.braconidae at gmail.com
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 3:41 PM Tony Rees via Taxacom <taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> >
> wrote:
>
> > I accidently sent this a few minutes ago to José only, but it was
> intended
> > for the wider list, hence the re-send...
> >
> > Regards - Tony
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 05:02
> > Subject: Re: Taxacom: Single official lists of taxa (sensu Doug Yanega
> many
> > proposals to this list)
> > To: Jose Fernandez-Triana <cnc.braconidae at gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > A propos of José's email reproduced below, I would point out that the
> type
> > of "bottom up" list preparation has been going on under a number guises
> > already, although (with exception of the "Official" LAN format) without
> any
> > official status for nomenclatural purposes. I refer, to my knowledge,
> first
> > to regional surveys (my particular exposure to these being in the marine
> > realm in the first instance) such as:
> >
> > - the European Register of Marine Species or ERMS - a coordinated
> activity
> > that was "farmed out" to relevant experts, then resulted in a paper
> > publication
> >
> > - its electronic/web based successor, the World Register of Marine
> Species,
> > again a (semi) coordinated activity to which several hundred experts now
> > contribute, sometimes with sub-Registers for "branding" purposes such as
> > The World Foraminifera Database and others
> >
> > - individual (or small group) ongoing databasing and/or publishing
> efforts
> > such as Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes, the world Diptera catalog "Systema
> > Dipterorum", similar for Fungi, Algae, and other groups; many then
> collated
> > in / feeding through to the "Catalogue of Life"
> >
> > - contributions to scholarly journals, a particular, self-identifying
> > series being that entitled "All genera of the world" in the journal
> > Megataxa, initiated by Zhi-Qiang Zhang from New Zealand
> >
> > - contributions (probably much less coordinated) by numerous individuals
> to
> > the online "The Paleobiology Database" for fossil taxa.
> >
> > From my point of view (as a top-down viewer in this instance) the main
> > drawback of these numerous and certainly most valuable and praiseworthy
> > activities is the lack of a facility to determine what is missing /
> > generate any idea of completeness, i.e. a "master template" in order that
> > areas that are outdated, or missing altogether, can be identified and
> > hopefully, filled. The coordination of activities in that respect would
> > appear to me to be the area that would benefit most from additional work
> > that is not presently being undertaken.
> >
> > For that one would need as a starting point at least a master list of
> > families of the kind that was produced some decades ago now (again by
> > co-opting relevant experts in every field) resulting in the 1982
> > publication of the Sybil Parker edited 2-volume compendium "Synopsis and
> > Classification of Living Organisms", and the 1993 Mike Benton-edited "The
> > Fossil Record 2", both landmarks in the field. More recently, Mike
> Ruggiero
> > did prepare a 2014 listing "Families of Living Organisms (FALO)" which is
> > indeed useful, but probably requires an update already.
> >
> > Operations like the Encyclopedia of Life, Catalogue of Life, GBIF, etc.
> > already produces "integrated classifications" (=backbone taxonomies or
> > hierarchies) of this sort but are of course secondary users of such
> > information as is produced in the first instance by relevant taxonomic
> > specialists.
> >
> > Regards - Tony
> >
> > Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> > https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=by7OJ2yxTAlZpqKK0v%2BSiC9Bp5HC6QCUO8aSdkzv5dE%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 00:54, Jose Fernandez-Triana via Taxacom <
> > taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > What a long exchange of ideas over the past couple of weeks or so! Even
> > > though at times it may look repetitive or tiring, I think this exchange
> > has
> > > been mostly valuable, as it is indeed important to hear other criteria
> > and
> > > see other perspectives (we have seen comments coming from different
> > sectors
> > > and degrees of specialization). I think these exchanges are one of the
> > main
> > > useful things of Taxacom.
> > >
> > > One of the main components of this discussion has been the proposal of
> > > having “master lists” of taxa. I copy below my signature the latest
> email
> > > from Doug about that -but, to be fair, he has been proposing that
> > approach
> > > for a long time (at least 2019 as far as I can remember, probably
> longer
> > > than that). And he has mentioned that several times in this Taxacom
> > list. I
> > > have to say that I fully agree with Doug’s proposal, and have at times
> > > wondered why there is not more support for that idea here. Instead, the
> > > discussion usually steers away towards other topics and his proposal
> gets
> > > once and again “forgotten” among the plethora of emails and discussions
> > > going into many tangents…
> > >
> > > I truly believe that such list (or lists) are indeed possible and would
> > > probably be the best way to deal with the many problems that we have
> been
> > > discussing here lately. What I think has been overlooked, or at least
> not
> > > discussed with more detail is how to generate such lists. Usually what
> I
> > > see here is the work from informatics or databasing experts, trying to
> > > obtain and curate such information from many sources, and I also see
> the
> > > efforts (wonderful! Do not get me wrong) of isolated persons spending a
> > > considerable amount of their time (mostly for free and out of love for
> > what
> > > they do) gathering such data and preparing such lists on their own.
> > >
> > > But there has never been a concerted effort (at least that I am aware
> of,
> > > but perhaps I am wrong!) to discuss how such list(s) could be generated
> > > from bottom to top, so to speak, i.e., generated by the community
> instead
> > > of done by the few brave “IT knights” that are trying to do it now. Why
> > do
> > > not we try to engage the wider taxonomic community to work together on
> > > that? And “reward” them by way of publications where such lists are
> > > initially presented, so that everyone that participates “gains”
> something
> > > (instead of just appearing to be just contributing her/his info “for
> > free”
> > > to some IT wizard that would generate the list, as it is usually the
> > case)?
> > >
> > > There are no real limitations to such an approach, if there would be a
> > will
> > > to do it. For example, scientific societies devoted to specific taxa
> > could
> > > decide to support more and advance such efforts. [I am going to use
> > > Hymenoptera here to use myself as a Guinea pig in the following
> exercise
> > (I
> > > am the current president of the Hym. Society)]. So, let’s say that the
> > > International Society of Hymenopterists (ISH) decides to publish lists
> of
> > > genera (and species, because a concerted effort needs not to be limited
> > > only to genera gender agreement, it can also be broadened to include
> many
> > > other things such as synonyms, species lists, etc.). Like all of the
> > hyper
> > > diverse insect orders, we do not really know how many species are
> already
> > > described (let alone how many undescribed… but that is another topic,
> so
> > I
> > > digress there). And we do not have lists of synonyms, gender of genera,
> > and
> > > so on and so forth for many Hymenoptera groups. But what if ISH members
> > > decide to work together towards that goal? The work can be spread by
> > > families, or any other, smaller grouping, such that work can be
> > manageable
> > > and papers can be produced as groups are completed. Such publications
> can
> > > later be used by all of the databasers and IT wizards, but the initial
> > list
> > > gets credited to the taxonomists that worked preparing, checking and
> > > analyzing those lists. One only needs to identify potential “project
> > leads”
> > > for specific taxa (be it family X or even a large genus Y) and have as
> > many
> > > people interested with that taxa getting involved in the work needed to
> > > prepare such lists (authorship of the papers would be determined by the
> > > individual contribution of each author). Taxa that are “orphan” (i.e.,
> > have
> > > no current  experts to work on that, or the current experts are not
> > > interested, would remain undone, until the time comes when someone
> would
> > be
> > > willing to work on that. But at least a good amount of taxa could be
> done
> > > in the meantime. [One different problem is groups where there are
> > different
> > > experts with competing views and, unfortunately, sometimes
> contradictory
> > or
> > > strongly in disagreement… But, from what I have seen, that tends to be
> > more
> > > common in vertebrates than in larger groups such as invertebrates
> > (although
> > > no group is exempt from human disagreements and miseries, of course! In
> > any
> > > case, I will not touch in this email about how to solve those
> potentially
> > > “difficult groups” to deal with when there are competing or opposed
> > experts
> > > (this could be discussed in a different email, if there is any interest
> > in
> > > doing that)].
> > >
> > > A few years ago I worked on a project like that, with a single
> subfamily
> > of
> > > Braconidae (around 3,000 described species). The work involved a) one
> > > undergrad student, b) one technician, c) one Ichneumonidae researcher,
> d)
> > > two Braconidae researchers, with the main expertise on that taxon. At
> the
> > > end everyone got “rewarded” (perhaps the better phrase would be
> “her/his
> > > work towards that list was properly recognized”) and the paper,
> published
> > > in 2020 and over 1,000 pages long, has become the standard for names
> and
> > > other things related to that subfamily (including the first time the
> > gender
> > > for all genera of that group where clearly and explicitly stated, and
> > over
> > > 300 new combinations were provided, etc.; see the link here:
> > > https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzookeys.pensoft.net%2Farticle%2F39128%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JUjB7K6mIIU5wYzAociK4c7gOd03xWJLro9rtR6r6X4%3D&reserved=0). [For what is worth, Doug
> > > helped me A LOT to correct many of the gender problems we encountered
> > > during that work, that is why I know he has been pushing for these
> > efforts
> > > for a long time].
> > >
> > > There is no limitation to continue doing that for other Hymenoptera
> taxa
> > > that are still pending or any other group. And, needless to say, many
> > other
> > > lists have been generated, both before and after my example, and many
> of
> > > them are better than mine! Thus, I do not pretend to have invented the
> > > wheel here, I only point to an example of collaborative work done
> bottom
> > to
> > > top and being able to deliver a list that was then usable for the wider
> > > community - as it has been discussed here for the past few weeks.
> > >
> > > Perhaps we could think about this approach, because then things would
> be
> > > more manageable and both the taxonomic and wider scientific community
> > would
> > > accomplish more. We could indeed have our cake and eat it, as long as
> we
> > > could agree on some minimum standards and organization of the work to
> be
> > > done…
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > And I will stop here, thanks to anyone that was patient enough to read
> up
> > > to this point!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Jose
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > José L. Fernández-Triana, Ph.D.
> > > Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
> > > Canadian National Collection of Insects (CNC)
> > > 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0C6, CANADA
> > > Phone: 613-759-1034. Email: jose.fernandez at agr.gc.ca
> > > Alternative email: cnc.braconidae at gmail.com
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> > https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> > https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lZI%2FTL7hxKtQAqnTNWCgCvUIoveOw1j0i6YlUcIs%2FsQ%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
> > about 36 years, 1987-2023.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6fafb14ea6af421f10a108db7cd24dfe%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638241014937638256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lZI%2FTL7hxKtQAqnTNWCgCvUIoveOw1j0i6YlUcIs%2FsQ%3D&reserved=0
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
> about 36 years, 1987-2023.
>