The intellectual content of taxonomy: a comment on DNA taxonomy

By D. Lipscomb, N. Platnick, Q. Wheeler. 2003

346 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Genetics, Molecular Biology, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2d726d4789c5a34fd96491e1491f506e589042a8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Genetics

In Molecular Biology

In Plant Science

Citations in the corpus

DNA barcoding using chitons (genus Mopalia) (2007, methodology): “We also note that this character-based method is consistent with the phylogenetic species concept (Cracraft 1983; Nixon & Wheeler 1990; Davis & Nixon 1992; Goldstein & Rob DeSalle 2000), in contrast to a distance-based assessment of diversity, which may identify clusters of similar entities but lack”
The perils of DNA barcoding and the need for integrative taxonomy. (2005, background): “Most of the recent, exciting theoretical and practical advances in taxonomy are ignored or undermined by a strictly DNA barcode approach that replaces deep, testable theories with arbitrary phenetic estimates of species diversity (Lipscomb et al., 2003).”
New insights into the phylogeny, systematics and DNA barcoding of Nemertea (2014, background): “However, among other factors, the functionality of DNA barcoding is contingent on two presumptions: the presence of a high-coverage barcode database, and the presence, within any given group of organisms, of a wide DNA barcoding gap – the difference between the highest intraspecific variation and th”
DNA barcoding and taxonomy in Diptera: a tale of high intraspecific variability and low identification success. (2006, background): “DNA barcoding and DNA taxonomy have attracted much attention and discussion (e.g., Baker et al., 2003; Barrett and Hebert, 2005; Blaxter and Floyd, 2003; Dunn, 2003; Ebach and Holdrege, 2005; Ferguson, 2002; Hebert and Barrett, 2005; Hebert and Gregory, 2005; Hebert et al., 2003a, 2003b, 2004a, 2004”
Taxonomic Impediment or Impediment to Taxonomy? A Commentary on Systematics and the Cybertaxonomic-Automation Paradigm (2007, background): “This ‘end-user’ attitude reflects a lack of appreciation that taxonomy, systematics and phylogeny are interwoven, hypothesisdriven sciences with a vigorous theoretical base (Lipscomb et al. 2003; Wheeler 2004; Carvalho et al. 2005; Crisci 2006).”
The unholy trinity: taxonomy, species delimitation and DNA barcoding (2005, background): “The pro-taxonomy commentaries strongly deride the lack of consideration of the intellectual content of classical taxonomy and can be summarized as in the following quote from Lipscomb et al. (2003) The twelve sequences represent two populations of six individuals each.”
A comparison of algorithms for the identification of specimens using DNA barcodes: examples from gymnosperms (2007, background): “The use of DNA sequences for arbitrary and capricious species delimitation is widely criticized (Tautz et al., 2002; Lipscomb et al., 2003; Sperling, 2003; Moritz and Cicero, 2004; Will and Rubinoﬀ, 2004; DeSalle et al., 2005; Monaghan et al., 2005; Vences et al., 2005b; Meier et al., in press).”
DNA barcoding as a tool for coral reef conservation (2007, methodology): “The use of DBC to deWne species has been highly controversial because it is based on two practices that are considered unreliable: inference of species trees from gene trees and the use of a phenetic (distance) measure to delineate taxa (Lipscomb et al. 2003; Will and RubinoV 2004; Brower 2006).”
The promise of a DNA taxonomy. (2004, neutral): “Bacteria also embody one of the more cogent arguments against a taxonomy based on ‘an infinitesimally tiny fraction of an organism’s genome’ (Lipscomb et al. 2003): horizontal gene transfer (Smith et al. 1992; Doolittle 1999; Nesbo et al. 2001).”
Integrative taxonomy: a multisource approach to exploring biodiversity. (2010, background): “This conclusion agrees with recent assertions that genetics may distort taxonomy when other data are neglected (15, 36, 40, 44, 65, 67).”
Comment on "Identifying spiders through DNA barcodes" (2005, background): “2003; Barrett and Hebert 2005) demonstrate a misunderstanding of its intellectual content (Lipscomb et al. 2003; Wheeler 2003, 2004; Will and Rubinoff 2004).”
Sequence-based species delimitation for the DNA taxonomy of undescribed insects. (2006, background): “Establishing this association is complicated due to intraspecific variation and the possible incongruence of gene and species histories that might prevent the easy recognition of these groups, in particular where only a single fragment of mtDNA is used (Lipscomb et al., 2003; Mallet and Willmott, 20”
DNA barcoding Australasian chondrichthyans: results and potential uses in conservation (2008, background): “Lipscomb et al. 2003; Moritz and Cicero 2004; Vogler and Monaghan 2007).”
DNA barcoding in land plants: evaluation of rbcL in a multigene tiered approach (2006, background): “Rather than turning taxonomists into ‘‘a high tech service industry’’ (Lipscomb et al. 2003; Will and Rubinoff 2004), barcoding would relieve them of a ‘‘low tech’’, time intensive service already provided.”
What can biological barcoding do for marine biology? (2005, background): “Barcoding does not mean the end of morphological studies The philosophy of barcoding has been criticized on various grounds, and obvious problems have been pointed out (e.g. Seberg et al. 2003; Lipscomb et al. 2003; Lee 2004; Will & Rubinoff 2004).”
DNA barcoding Australia's fish species (2005, background): “However, the approach is not without controversy (e.g. Lipscomb et al. 2003; Moritz & Cicero 2004).”