Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32634138›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2020

Principles for creating a single authoritative list of the world's species.

Stephen T Garnett, Les Christidis, Stijn Conix, Mark J Costello, Frank E Zachos, Olaf S Bánki, Yiming Bao, Saroj K Barik, John S Buckeridge, Donald Hobern and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Species Diagnosis and DNA Taxonomy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  8. Widespread support for a global species list with a formal governance system.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  9. Unified and pluralistic ideals for data sharing and reuse in biodiversity.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Beneficial and biocontrol effects ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Stephen T GarnettResearch Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0724-7060
Les ChristidisSouthern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3345-6034
Stijn ConixCentre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1487-0213
Mark J CostelloSchool of Environment, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-2362-0328
Frank E ZachosNatural History Museum Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Olaf S BánkiSpecies 2000, Naturalis, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6197-9951
Yiming BaoNational Genomics Data Center, Beijing Institute of Genomics (China National Center for Bioinformation), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Saroj K BarikCSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Rana Pratap Marg, Lucknow, India.
John S BuckeridgeEarth & Oceanic Systems Group, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia.
Donald HobernSpecies 2000, Canberra, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6492-4016
Aaron LienSchool of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Arizona, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5131-688X
Narelle MontgomeryDepartment of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Canberra, Australia.
Svetlana NikolaevaDepartment of Earth Sciences, The Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom.
Richard L PyleB. P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawai'i, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0768-1286
Scott A ThomsonChelonian Research Institute, Oviedo, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1279-2722
Peter Paul van DijkGlobal Wildlife Conservation, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7283-7000
Anthony WhalenDepartment of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Canberra, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9469-9953
Zhi-Qiang ZhangManaaki Whenua-Landcare Research and School of Biological Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-4172-0592
Kevin R ThieleTaxonomy Australia, Australian Academy of Science, Canberra, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6658-6636

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lists of species underpin many fields of human endeavour, but there are currently no universally accepted principles for deciding which biological species should be accepted when there are alternative taxonomic treatments (and, by extension, which scientific names should be applied to those species). As improvements in information technology make it easier to communicate, access, and aggregate biodiversity information, there is a need for a framework that helps taxonomists and the users of taxonomy decide which taxa and names should be used by society whilst continuing to encourage taxonomic research that leads to new species discoveries, new knowledge of species relationships, and the refinement of existing species concepts. Here, we present 10 principles that can underpin such a governance framework, namely (i) the species list must be based on science and free from nontaxonomic considerations and interference, (ii) governance of the species list must aim for community support and use, (iii) all decisions about list composition must be transparent, (iv) the governance of validated lists of species is separate from the governance of the names of taxa, (v) governance of lists of accepted species must not constrain academic freedom, (vi) the set of criteria considered sufficient to recognise species boundaries may appropriately vary between different taxonomic groups but should be consistent when possible, (vii) a global list must balance conflicting needs for currency and stability by having archived versions, (viii) contributors need appropriate recognition, (ix) list content should be traceable, and (x) a global listing process needs both to encompass global diversity and to accommodate local knowledge of that diversity. We conclude by outlining issues that must be resolved if such a system of taxonomic list governance and a unified list of accepted scientific names generated are to be universally adopted.

Indexed as

ClassificationBiodiversityDecision MakingKnowledgeReproducibility of ResultsSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID32634138
PMCPMC7340280

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.