Taxacom: an idea on data reuse preprint for systematics

Sat May 24 05:20:47 CDT 2025

>>> If I register an ISSN for the platform, 
>>> then synonyms published on it would be valid under ICZN rules

Just to get this single issue clear: proposing or rejecting synonymies are based on taxonomic decisions and are not regulated by the ICodeZN.

[Note also: Code compliance for e-only publications -- and any nomenclatural acts they may contain -- requires not only an ISSN but also registration in ZooBank, archiving, PDF or PDF/A and a few other things.]

/Thomas Pape

-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Kuoi Zhang via Taxacom
Sent: 24. maj 2025 08:48
To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
Subject: Re: Taxacom: an idea on data reuse preprint for systematics

Dr Yanega, thanks for your reply.

Regarding the ideas about reviewer opinions on the synonym paper, I agree that such work doesn't necessarily require significant peer review. That aligns with one part of my aim. Another important aspect of my aim is to promote repeatability and hypothesis testing based on published data. A new synonym could be a byproduct of a hypothesis-testing paper. However, if the original authors treat every variation as a new taxon, that approach is not very scientific. Unfortunately, this kind of hypothesis-testing process can be quite frustrating. My ambition is to make taxonomy a real science.

A bit of interesting background: my first paper, published in 2019, focused on three new synonyms. I'm not the typical person who begins their career by describing new species.

Here are two common situations I referred to earlier:
(1) Someone describes a new species without considering historical literature or variation.
(2) A dataset does not support the conclusions drawn, or the results are not repeatable.

Your first point is very interesting. In fact, my comments were about preprints, but people often assume I'm referring to journals, which I didn't expect. Preprints allow for quick visibility of papers without peer review, only basic quality screening (and the quality bar is not very high). One reason I'm considering a preprint platform rather than a formal journal is that if authors don't initially submit high-quality manuscripts, readers will see the overall quality level and decide what types of papers are acceptable, and then submit similar quality papers.

SCIE and Scopus indexing are also important for journals, but for someone like me without a team, it's difficult to reach that level. I understand that many researchers know they could write papers on new synonyms, but producing a manuscript takes considerable effort. Most people would prefer to aim for a relatively high-impact journal to maintain or advance their careers, otherwise, they may not find it worth the time.

One benefit of preprints is that authors can still submit their paper elsewhere for journal publication. I think launching a preprint platform is a good first step for visibility and outreach, convincing people of its value and attracting good-quality submissions. Once that is successful, we could consider starting a journal. However, I don't think the timing is right yet, unless there are already many good manuscripts ready.

Another reason is that journals require a large team of editorial members with strong reputations and influence, usually as volunteers. As an early-career researcher, I might eventually leave the field of systematics and taxonomy due to limited job opportunities. I don't yet have the reputation or network to lead such a project alone. Even now, I am happy to support it as an assistant, with someone else taking the lead, I am delighted to see my idea come true one day.

If I register an ISSN for the platform, then synonyms published on it would be valid under ICZN rules (after registration in ZooBank). I'm not sure about non-animal codes. Either way, both preprints and journals are always time-stamped, so there's no need to worry about that.

Best regards,
Guoyi

Guoyi Zhang (she/her), MRes, PhD candidate Personal Web<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmalacology.net%2F&data%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C8323f569f5b949a8653808dd9aacb288%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638836788753651491%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdataPLkwQzbo6ZW7pOPU9GZ1%2FHJ%2F8cdlXppjLSpQnP9L4%3D&reserved=0> | OCRID<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Forcid.org%2F0000-0002-3426-9273&data%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C8323f569f5b949a8653808dd9aacb288%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638836788753670496%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CN3Ox2t%2BJ7IJ7L28GmStlNL12xYX2RhMOQhQxoLmN0U%3D&reserved=0>
School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences University of New South Wales Australian Museum Research Institute Australian Museum

________________________________
From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> on behalf of Douglas Yanega via Taxacom <taxacom at lists.ku.edu>
Sent: Saturday, 24 May 2025 1:42
To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu <taxacom at lists.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: Taxacom: an idea on data reuse preprint for systematics

I'm not good at being brief, but I'll try:

For very small contributions of acts that affect zoological nomenclature, *in principle* the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature - the ICZN's journal - is a venue that handles several of the sorts of things you refer to. The reality is that the turnaround time for submissions to BZN is not fast, though it pains me to say it, as I am one of the assistant editors.

Not too long ago, I asked the other Commissioners if we might want to set up some sort of "fast track" method of getting minor nomenclatural notes into circulation, like within a month of submission, and the response was lukewarm.

I honestly think that there are a lot of taxonomists, myself included, who are sitting on one to many minor things, like corrections to spellings, unreplaced homonyms, unrecognized synonymies, gender agreement corrections, First Reviser actions, and other small but important items that need to be published, but are not part of some larger revisionary work. I'm not a snail taxonomist, for example, so what do I do if I discover a snail name that is being demonstrably misspelled in the literature? To my mind, these sorts of things are unified in that they should not require *significant* review, if any at all. In many cases, all it truly requires is one *qualified* reviewer.

The idea of a venue to disseminate these sorts of acts is, in that respect, potentially very valuable if it can be implemented in such a way that three crucial things are part of the model:

(1) there is an interface where *multiple* people can see any and all works submitted for publication, and *everyone* can act as a reviewer - the model of "only a tiny number of anonymous reviewers" is the most harmful self-imposed constraint on science that exists. This is why papers keep getting published that contain homonyms, synonyms, misspellings, multiple variant spellings, and other errors - NOT ENOUGH REVIEWERS. There is literally no reason why a paper can't have several dozen people review it, and catch every error before it makes it into print. The system is not hard to implement - everyone who subscribes gets auto-notified about every submission, and is free to review any of them. A submission could have a dozen reviews or more within 24 hours.

(2) submissions are time-stamped, and assigned useful keywords. It is not helpful, for instance, if someone submits a new replacement name for a homonym, and then someone else sees this and submits their own suggestion for a replacement of the same name. A time stamp will ensure that it's "first come, first published", and mandatory keywords will make it easier to spot overlapping submissions. We can't have people at one another's proverbial throats, and there is already - absurdly enough
- a cutthroat competition to replace homonyms. That sort of unprofessional behavior should be discouraged.

(3) the new e-journal complies FULLY with the provisions in the Code for digital-only publication, so nomenclatural acts published in it are *available*, and not technically unpublished (a MAJOR problem with many existing e-journals, whose editors do not know or enforce the Code's strict regulations).

If you can address those three issues, I'm fairly sure you'll find there is a real demand for that sort of venue.

I might note that features #1 and #2 are both fully implemented in Wikipedia and Wikispecies, so they've been proven to work. What these venues lack is Code-compliance, and well-defined administrative oversight.

Peace,

--
Doug Yanega      Dept. of Entomology       Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314  voicemail:951-827-8704
FaceBook: Doug Yanega (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffaculty.ucr.edu%2F~heraty%2Fyanega.html&data%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C8323f569f5b949a8653808dd9aacb288%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638836788753684412%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JTVbWwk0tX5ut2pHJ2h9n8l%2FWSdSiV0OJfIcipDP8kw%3D&reserved=0
   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82 _______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List

Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for 38 years, 1987-2025.

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

_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List

Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for 38 years, 1987-2025.

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