Unitary or unified taxonomy?

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 359, Issue 1444, 2004, Pages 699-710

  Scoble, Malcolm J ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCES   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Internet; Multiple classifications; Taxonomy; Unitary taxonomy; Web revisions

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION; DATABASE; INTERNET; TAXONOMY;

EID: 1942487842     PISSN: 09628436     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2003.1456     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Ashburner, M. 2002 Correspondence. Antenna 26, 73-74.
2. Beccaloni, G. W., Scoble, M. J., Robinson, G. S. & Pitkin, B. (eds) 2003 The global Lepidoptera names index (Leplndex). See www.nhm.ac.uk/ entomology/lepindex accessed 1 August 2003.
3. Berendsohn, W. G. 1995 The concept of 'potential taxa' in databases. Taxon 44, 207-212.
4. Berendsohn, W. G. (ed.) 2000 BioCISE: resource identification for a biological collection information service in Europe. Berlin: Botanic Garden and Botanical Museum Berlin-Dahlem. See http://www.bgbm.fu-berlin.de/biocise/.
5. Berendsohn, W. G. (ed.) 2003 MoReTax: handling factual information linked to taxonomic concepts in biology. Bonn: Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.
6. Blaxter, M. L. 2004 The promise of a DNA taxonomy. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 359, 669-679. (DOI 10.1098/rstb.2003.1447.)
7. Blunt, W. 1971 The compleat naturalist. A life of Linnaeus. London: Collins.
8. Clerck, C. A. 1757 Aranei suecici, descriptionibus et figuris oeneis illustrati, ad genera subalterna redacti speciebus ultra LX determinati. Svenska spindlar, uti sina hufvud-slagter indelte samt. Stockholm.
9. Copp, C. J. T. 2003 Creating and managing a thesaurus for accessing natural science collection and observation data. In ENHSIN: the European Natural History Specimen Information Network (ed. M. J. Scoble), pp. 149-164. London: The Natural History Museum.
10. Francki, R. I. B., Fauquet, C. M., Knudson, D. L. & Brown, F. 1990 Classification and nomenclature of viruses. Arch. Virol. Suppl. 2, 1-445.
11. Froese, R. & Pauly, D. (eds) 2002 FishBase. See http://www.fishbase. org accessed 20 May 2003.
12. Geoffroy, M. & Berendsohn, W. G. 2003 The concept problem in taxonomy: importance, components, approaches. In MoReTax: handling factual information linked to taxonomic concepts in biology (ed. W. G. Berendsohn), pp. 5-14. Bonn: Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.
13. Godfray, H. C. J. 2002a How might more systematics be funded? Antenna 26, 11-17.
14. Godfray, H. C. J. 2002b Challenges for taxonomy. Nature 417, 17-19.
15. Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., McNeill, J., Mayo, M. A., Minelli, A., Sneath, P. H. A., Tindall, B. J., Trehane, P. & Tubbs, P. (eds) 1996 Draft BioCode: the prospective international rules for the scientific names of organisms. Taxon 45, 349-372.
16. Greuter, W. (and 11 others) 2000 International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (St Louis Code). Regnum Vegetabile 138. Königstein: Koeltz Scientific Books.
17. Güntsch, A., Döring, M., Geoffroy, M., Glück, K., Li, J., Röpert, D., Specht, F. & Berendsohn, W. G. 2003 The taxonomic editor. In MoReTax: handling factual information linked to taxonomic concepts in biology (ed. W. Berendsohn), pp. 43-56. Bonn: Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.
18. Hebert, P. D. N., Cywinska, A., Ball, S. L. & deWaar, J. 2003 Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 313-321. (DOI 10.1098/rspb.2002.2218.)
19. Holloway, J. D. 1987 The moths of Borneo, vol. 3. Kuala Lumpur: Southdene. Online version at www.arbec.com.my/moths/introduction.htm.
20. ICZN (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) 1999 International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 4th edn. London: International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature.
21. Jeffrey, C. 1986 Some differences between the botanical and zoological codes. In Biological nomenclature today (ed. W. D. L. Ride & T. Younès), pp. 62-65. Oxford: IRL Press.
22. Knapp, S., Bateman, R. M., Chalmers, N. R., Humphries, C. J., Rainbow, P. S., Smith, A. B., Taylor, R. I., Vane-Wright, R. I. & Wilkinson, M. 2002 Taxonomy needs evolution, not revolution. Nature 419, 559.
23. Knapp, S., Lamas, G., Nic Lughadha, E. & Novarino, G. 2004 Stability or stasis in the names of organisms: the evolving codes of nomenclature. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 359, 611-622. (DOI 10.1098/rstb.2003.1445.)
24. Koerner, L. 1999 Linnaeus: nature and nation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25. Koperski, M., Sauer, M., Braun, W. & Gradstein, S. R. 2000 Referenzliste der Moose Deutschlands. Schift. Veg. 34, 1-519.
26. Linnaeus, C. 1753 Species plantarum. Stockholm.
27. Linnaeus, C. 1758 Systema naturae, 10th edn. Stockholm.
28. Lipscomb, D., Platnick, N. & Wheeler, Q. 2003 The intellectual content of taxonomy: a comment on DNA taxonomy. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 65-66.
29. Minelli, A. 2003 The status of taxonomic literature. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 75-76.
30. Nic Lughadha, E. 2004 Towards a working list of all known plant species. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 359, 681-687. (DOI 10.1098/rstb.2003.1446.)
31. Noyes, J. S. 2003 Universal Chalcidoidea database. See www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/chalcidoids/index.html accessed 17 September 2003.
32. Otte, D. & Naskrecki, P. 1997 Orthoptera species online. See http://140.247.119.145/Orthoptera/ accessed 21 May 2003.
33. Peterson, A. P. 2002 Zoonomen nomenclatural data. See http://www.zoonomen.net.
34. Platnick, N. I. 2003 The world spider catalog, version 3.5. American Museum of Natural History. See http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/ catalog81-87/index.html.
35. Pullan, M. R., Watson, M. F., Kennedy, J. B., Raguenaud, C. & Hyam, R. 2000 The Prometheus taxonomic model: a practical approach to representing multiple classifications. Taxon 49, 55-75.
36. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2000 World checklist and bibliography series. See http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/wcb/ accessed 20 May 2003.
37. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew 2002 ePIC: Electronic Plant Information Centre. See http://www.kew.org/epic/index.htm accessed 20 May 2002.
38. Scoble, M. J. (ed.) 2003 ENHSIN: the European Natural History Specimen Information Network. London: The Natural History Museum.
39. Scotland, R., Hughes, C., Bailey, D. & Wortley, A. 2003 The Big Machine and the much-maligned taxonomist. Syst. Biodiver. 1, 139-143.
40. Seberg, O., Humphries, C. J., Knapp, S., Stevenson, D. W., Petersen, G., Scharff, N. & Anderson, N. M. 2003 Shortcuts in systematics? A commentary on DNA-based taxonomy Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 63-65.
41. Sibley, C. G. & Monroe, B. L. 1990 Distribution and taxonomy of birds of the world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
42. Skerman, V. B. D., McGowan, V. & Sneath, P. H. A. (eds) 1980 Approved lists of bacterial names. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 30, 225-420.
43. Sneath, P. H. A. 1986 Nomenclature of bacteria. In Biological nomenclature today (ed. W. D. L. Ride & T. Younès), pp. 36-47. Oxford: IRL Press.
44. Sneath, P. H. A. (ed.) 1992 International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria, 1990 revision. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology.
45. Tautz, D., Arctander, P., Minelli, A., Thomas, R. H. & Vogler, A. P. 2003 A plea for DNA taxonomy. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 70-74.
46. Thompson, F. C. 1993 Names: the keys to biodiversity. See http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/diptera/keys.htm.
47. Thompson, F. C. (ed.) 2000 Biosystematic database of world diptera. See http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/diptera/biosys.htm accessed 17 August 2003.
48. Thorne, J. 2003 The Zoological Record and registration of new names in zoology. The Linnean 19, 22-26.
49. Vane-Wright, R. I. 2003 Indifferent philosophy versus almighty authority: on consistency, consensus and unitary taxonomy. Syst. Biodiver. 1, 3-11.
50. Wheeler, Q. D. 2004 Taxonomic triage and the poverty of phylogeny. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 359, 571-583. (DOI 10.1098/rstb.2003.1452.)
51. Ytow, N., Morse, D. R. & Roberts, D. McL. 2001 Nomencurator: a nomenclatural history model to handle multiple taxonomic views. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 73, 81-98. (DOI:10.1006/bjls.2001.0527.)