The integrative future of taxonomy
By Jose Padial, Aurélien Miralles, I. J. De la Riva, M. Vences. Frontiers in Zoology, 2010
1,788 citations recorded by the source corpus.
BackgroundTaxonomy is the biological discipline that identifies, describes, classifies and names extant and extinct species and other taxa. Nowadays, species taxonomy is confronted with the challenge to fully incorporate new theory, methods and data from disciplines that study the origin, limits and evolution of species.ResultsIntegrative taxonomy has been proposed as a framework to bring together these conceptual and methodological developments. Here we review perspectives for an integrative taxonomy that directly bear on what species are, how they can be discovered, and how much diversity is on Earth.ConclusionsWe conclude that taxonomy needs to be pluralistic to improve species discovery and description, and to develop novel protocols to produce the much-needed inventory of life in a reasonable time. To cope with the large number of candidate species revealed by molecular studies of eukaryotes, we propose a classification scheme for those units that will facilitate the subsequent assembly of data sets for the formal description of new species under the Linnaean system, and will ultimately integrate the activities of taxonomists and molecular biologists.
Subfields: Molecular Biology, Paleontology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/90f5268bec76e0825b87a100f8fbbd109f3b05f0
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Molecular Biology
In Paleontology
Citations in the corpus
- Geodiversity and endemism in the iconic Australian Pilbara region: a review of landscape evolution and biotic response in an ancient refugium (2013, methodology): “With an emphasis on demographic and evolutionary processes responsible for lineage diversification, it will be valuable to utilize an ‘integrative taxonomy’ framework (Padial et al., 2010) for improved species delimitation and taxonomic understanding.”
- Integrative taxonomy, or iterative taxonomy? (2011, background): “There may be evolutionary interpretations for discordance among data partitions that are consistent with the species boundaries suggested by some evidence (Padial et al., 2010; SchlickSteiner et al., 2010).”
- Species in lichen-forming fungi: balancing between conceptual and practical considerations, and between phenotype and phylogenomics (2021, background): “As a consequence, modern alpha taxonomy largely aims at combining phylogenetic and phenotypic evidence in a polyphasic approach or integrative taxonomy (Dayrat 2005; Will et al. 2005; Padial et al. 2010; Crous et al. 2015; Goulding and Dayrat 2016; Lücking 2019; Vinarski 2020; Lücking et al. 2020a),”
- Species Delimitation using Genome-Wide SNP Data (2013, neutral): “Combining data from morphology, ecology, behavior, and genetics is the goal of a pluralistic integrative taxonomy Padial et al. (2010); Leach´e et al. (2009).”
- The combined influence of riverine barriers and flooding gradients on biogeographical patterns for amphibians and squamates in south‐eastern Amazonia (2016, methodology): “We used an integrative approach to taxon identification, combining morphological, acoustic, ecological and molecular techniques (Padial et al., 2010).”
- How to fail at species delimitation (2013, positive): “This approach is consistent with the spirit of integrative taxonomy, which argues that taxonomic inference should be based on congruence across analyses that utilize multiple sources of data (e.g. Padial et al. 2010; Schlick-Steiner et al. 2010).”
- Cryptic species in Iphisa elegans Gray, 1851 (Squamata: Gymnophthalmidae) revealed by hemipenial morphology and molecular data (2012, background): “…between different types of characters (hemipenial, mitochondrial, and nuclear data) in I. elegans provides strong evidence supporting the existence of distinct species (Dayrat, 2005; DeSalle, Egan & Siddal, 2005; Padial et al., 2010) that remained masked by overall homogeneous external morphology.”
- The impact of global climate change on genetic diversity within populations and species (2013, background): “Cryptic diversity is a common phenomenon and has become a focus of biodiversity research following (i) methodological advances in integrated taxonomy (Wheeler 2004, 2008; Dayrat 2005; Padial et al. 2010), DNA taxonomy (Vogler & Monaghan 2007), DNA barcoding (Hebert et al.”
- Species delimitation, patterns of diversification and historical biogeography of the Neotropical frog genus Adenomera (Anura, Leptodactylidae) (2014, background): “Nevertheless, this study leaves the door wide open for integrative taxonomic revisions of Adenomera (Dayrat, 2005; Padial et al., 2010).”
- ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation (2012, background): “…an integrative framework (Dayrat 2005; Will et al. 2005; Ah-rens et al. 2007; Miller 2007; Vogler & Monaghan 2007; Wiens 2007; Bond & Stockman 2008; Giraud et al. 2008; De´praz et al. 2009; Damm et al. 2010; Goetze 2010; O’Meara 2010; Padial et al. 2010; Ross et al. 2010; Yeates et al. 2010).”
- Species Delimitation: A Decade After the Renaissance (2013, neutral): “These publication trends suggest that the recent paradigm shift in phylogenetic systematics to incorporate species trees (29) is having a positive im‐ pact on the development of new SDL methods, which are gradually being incorporated into integrative taxonomic practices for the discovery of cryptic ”
- The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice. (2017, background): “If a representative group of specimens emits calls different from another group of specimens (even with weak quantitative differences such as statistical differences between call traits with overlapping ranges) and a second diagnostic difference concordantly distinguishes the two groups of specimens”