Does counting species count as taxonomy? On misrepresenting systematics, yet again

Area of Science:

• Systematics and Taxonomy
• Evolutionary Biology
• Biodiversity Science

Background:

• Recent commentary suggests taxonomy is thriving based on the rate of new species descriptions.
• This view perceives species as static metrics, overlooking the conceptual and epistemological depth of systematics.
• The commentary advocates for increasing the pace of new species descriptions.

Discussion:

• This paper refutes the notion that increased species description rates signify a healthy taxonomic enterprise.
• It argues that this perspective is a one-dimensional portrayal, neglecting the core of taxonomic practice.
• The authors contend that professional taxonomy is declining in the face of the extinction crisis.

Key Insights:

• Taxonomy's value lies in empirically based classifications reflecting evolutionary history, not just species counts.
• Homology assessments are central to systematics and comparative biology.
• Accelerating species descriptions at the expense of historical and comparative depth is detrimental.

Outlook:

• The decline in professional taxonomy poses a threat to phylogenetic systematics and comparative biology.
• This decline impacts the foundational understanding of life's diversity and evolutionary relationships.
• Urgent attention is needed to support the empirical and historical depth of taxonomic research.