Summary of Nomenclature and GUIDs

Sally Hinchcliffe S.Hinchcliffe at KEW.ORG
Fri Nov 11 14:44:03 CET 2005


Hi all
in response to Yde (and Rod too on a side discussion) - I think we're
straying into discussion of CBOL itself & as I know they are still in
the policy drafting stage, maybe some of these comments would be best
directed straight to the people concerned

http://www.barcodinglife.org/static/cbol/cbol.html
http://barcoding.si.edu/index_detail.htm

Not sure which is the 'official' home page out of these two

Sally


> >>[Yde] A detail I would like to discuss  within this context in the
> >>near future is the best possible way to link species names to
> >>genetic resources (e.g. DNA barcodes).
> >
> >[Sally] This is something that CBOL have been discussing. I think
> >that their current draft is that barcode sequences should be linked
> >to the best available name (ie a well defined concept if there's a
> >checklist, otherwise a name from a nomenclator, & only if there's
> >nothing available from a nomenclator should they go for just a name,
> >or even
> >an unpublished candidate name like sp A, sp. B ).
> >When CBOL were discussing the link to names earlier this year (in
> >May) things weren't so well advanced on the GUID front so their
> >approach may need to be reviewed if we do get a good system of GUIDs
> >in place for names or concepts. However I know that they are
> >including GBIF in the discussions so hopefully whatever they come up
> >with will be compatible with whatever we come up with ...
>
> Thanks Sally and Rod (for technical comments). Yes I agree that
> linking to the best available (checklist/index) concept or
> (nomenclator) name seems to be the proper way, however, here exactly
> my fear begins. I simply don't believe that because of the inherent
> instability of taxon concepts and because of the taxonomical
> under-education of most molecular workers this will provide a
> reliable model. I am afraid that when no very strict regulations on
> identification, voucher typification and naming of used lab-specimen
> will be established, we will not only end up with a similar bad
> situation as currently in GeneBank (30% of the sequenced taxa wrongly
> identified and no vouchers for control), but also an unworkable
> taxonomic framework because of disintegrating taxon concepts.
> Especially because the expected expansion of DNA barcodes will be
> much larger compared to current sequence data, which could enforce
> fuzzy working.
> Of course ideally DNA barcoding should proceed from type specimen
> (not found realistic in our museum) when possible and professional
> taxonomists should be closely involved. I know CBOL is working on
> guidelines for vouchering, and so on, but still...
>
> Sorry about my sceptics and have a nice weekend!
>
> Yde

*** Sally Hinchcliffe
*** Computer section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
*** tel: +44 (0)20 8332 5708
*** S.Hinchcliffe at rbgkew.org.uk




More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list