Should universal guidelines be applied to taxonomic research?

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 90, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 761-764

  Esselstyn, Jacob A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Character variation; DNA sequences; Morphology; Museum collections; Nomenclature; Species delimitation; Systematics

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CHEMOTAXONOMY; MORPHOLOGY; NEW SPECIES; NOMENCLATURE; TYPE SPECIMEN;

EID: 33947384076     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: 10958312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00776.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Blaxter M, Floyd R. 2003. Molecular taxonomics for biodiversity surveys: already a reality. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 268-269.
2. Dayrat B. 2005. Towards integrative taxonomy. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 85: 407-415.
3. Frost DR, Hillis DM. 1990. Species in concept and practice: herpetological applications. Herpetologica 46: 87-103.
4. Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, deWaard JR. 2003. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 270: 313-321.
5. Hillis DM, Wiens JJ. 2000. Molecules versus morphology in systematics: conflicts, artifacts, and misconceptions. In: Wiens JJ, ed. Phylogenetic analysis of morphological data. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1-19.
6. Lipscomb D, Platnick N, Wheeler Q. 2003. The intellectual content of taxonomy: a comment on DNA taxonomy. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 65-66.
7. Mallet J, Willmott K. 2003. Taxonomy: renaissance or Tower of Babel? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 57-59.
8. Manamendra-Arachchi K, Pethiyagoda R. 2005. The Sri Lankan shrub-frogs of the genus Philautus Gistel, 1848 (Ranidae: Rhacophorinae), with description of 27 new species. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 12: 163-303.
9. Mayden RL. 1999. Consilience and a hierarchy of species concepts: advances toward closure on the species puzzle. Journal of Nematology 31: 95-116.
10. Messenger SL, McGuire JA. 1998. Morphology, molecules, and the phylogenetics of cetaceans. Systematic Biology 47: 90-124.
11. Min MS, Yang SY, Bonett RM, Vieites DR, Brandon RA, Wake DB. 2005. Discovery of the first Asian plethodontid salamander. Nature 435: 87-90.
12. Musser GG. 1982a. Results of the Archbold Expeditions, 110. Crunomys and the small-bodied shrew rats native to the Philippine Islands and Sulawesi (Celebes). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 174: 1-95.
13. Musser GG. 1982b. Results of the Archbold Expeditions, 108. The definition of Apomys, a native rat of the Philippine Islands. American Museum Novitates 2746: 1-46.
14. de Queiroz K. 1998. The general lineage concept of species, species criteria, and the process of speciation. In: Howard, DJ, Berlocher, SH, eds. Endless forms: species and speciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 55-75.
15. Rickart EA, Heaney LR. 2002. Further studies on the chromosomes of Philippine rodents (Muridae: Murinae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. 115: 473-487.
16. Rickart EA, Heaney LR, Goodman SM, Jansa S. 2005. Review of the Philippine genera Chrotomys and Celaenomys (Murinae) and descriptioin of a new species. Journal of Mammalogy 86: 415-428.
17. Sanders KL, Malhotra A, Thorpe RS. 2006. Combining molecular, morphological and ecological data to infer species boundaries in a cryptic tropical pitviper. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 87: 343-364.
18. Scotland RW, Olmstead RG, Bennett JR. 2003. Phylogeny reconstruction: the role of morphology. Systematic Biology 52: 539-548.
19. Sites JW, Marshall JC. 2003. Delimiting species: a renaissance issue in systematic biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 462-470.
20. Smith AB. 1998. What does palaeontology contribute to systematics in a molecular world? Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9: 437-447.
21. Steppan SJ, Zawadski C, Heaney LR. 2003. Molecular phylogeny of the endemic Philippine rodent Apomys (Muridae) and the dynamics of diversification in an oceanic archipelago. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 80: 699-715.
22. Wheeler QD, Raven PH, Wilson EO. 2004. Taxonomy: impediment or expedient? Science 303: 285.
23. Wiens JJ. 2004. The role of morphological data in phylogeny reconstruction. Systematic Biology 53: 653-661.
24. Wiens JJ, Servedio MR. 2000. Species delimitation in systematics: inferring diagnostic differences between species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 267: 631-636.
25. Winker K. 1996. The crumbling infrastructure of biodiversity: the avian example. Conservation Biology 10: 703-707.