I started this note based on Rod Page's Blog thoughts on Wiki Modeling, which got me thinking.<div><a href="http://iphylo.blogspot.com/2009/02/wiki-modelling-part-1.html">http://iphylo.blogspot.com/2009/02/wiki-modelling-part-1.html</a> <br>
<div><br></div><div>Also, if you go back to the 2006 tdwg list I tried to make this point earlier, but did not seem to succeed</div><div>and that is why I ended up creating my own species concept identifiers.</div><div><br>
</div><div><p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">The NCBI taxon id works in a way similar to the GeoSpecies ID's in that the ID stays the same despite changes in nomenclature.</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">I would use this except that there is no NCBI ID for most species. There needs to be a sequence for there to be an NCBI ID.</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">In this sense, the NCBI ID and GeoSpecies ID are compatible types of OTU's.</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">It seems that the genomics/proteomics people are already using forms of the NCBI ID as Species identifiers (URI's)</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">For example, these are similar concepts, in that the meaning is similar and they stay the same</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">despite changes in nomenclature. They are being used as Species Concept identifiers.</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande"><a href="http://species.geospecies.org/spec_concept_uuid/0fcb5b7e-bcfc-4b56-b565-e1e38768badd/">http://species.geospecies.org/spec_concept_uuid/0fcb5b7e-bcfc-4b56-b565-e1e38768badd/</a></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande"><a href="http://bio2rdf.org/taxon:7163">http://bio2rdf.org/taxon:7163</a></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande"><a href="http://purl.uniprot.org/taxonomy/7163">http://purl.uniprot.org/taxonomy/7163</a></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">These are names or taxonomic hypothesis:</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande"><a href="http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:ubio.org:namebank:2593981">http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:ubio.org:namebank:2593981</a> <- name Aedes vexans , taxonomic hierarchy (hypothesis), changes with changes in nomenclature</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande"><a href="http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:ubio.org:classificationbank:11149341">http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:ubio.org:classificationbank:11149341</a> <- taxonomic hierarchy (hypothesis)</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande"><a href="http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:ubio.org:classificationbank:2463176">http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:ubio.org:classificationbank:2463176</a> <- taxonomic hierarchy (hypothesis)</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">This gets into what makes a good species concept URI. (identifier)</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">The first set of identifiers can represent a Species Concept independent of a particular taxonomic hypothesis</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">The second set of identifiers represent various taxonomic hypotheses, that might apply to a specific species concept.</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">Was I able to clearly demonstrate the differences between these two type of identifiers?</p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande; min-height: 13.0px"><br></p>
<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Lucida Grande">Under this model, the species hypothesis i.e. name is not the Species Concept.</p><br>Comments, suggestions and disagreements are welcome :-)</div><div>
<br></div><div>- Pete<br>---------------------------------------------------------------<br>Pete DeVries<br>Department of Entomology<br>University of Wisconsin - Madison<br>445 Russell Laboratories<br>1630 Linden Drive<br>
Madison, WI 53706<br>------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</div></div>