Bortolus Alejandro
Centro Nacional Patagónico, National Council for Scientific and Technological Investigations, CONICET, Ecología Terrestre, Chubut, Argentina.
Ambio. 2008 Mar;37(2):114-8. doi: 10.1579/0044-7447(2008)37[114:ecitbs]2.0.co;2.
Why do ecologists seem to underestimate the consequences of using bad taxonomy? Is it because the consequences of doing so have not been yet scrutinized well enough? Is it because these consequences are irrelevant? In this paper I examine and discuss these questions, focusing on the fact that because ecological works provide baseline information for many other biological disciplines, they play a key role in spreading and magnifying the abundance of a variety of conceptual and methodological errors. Although overlooked and underestimated, this cascade-like process originates from trivial taxonomical problems that affect hypotheses and ideas, but it soon shifts into a profound practical problem affecting our knowledge about nature, as well as the ecosystem structure and functioning and the efficiency of human health care programs. In order to improve the intercommunication among disciplines, I propose a set of specific requirements that peer reviewed journals should request from all authors, and I also advocate for urgent institutional and financial support directed at reinvigorating the formation of scientific collections that integrate taxonomy and ecology.
为什么生态学家似乎低估了使用错误分类法的后果？是因为这样做的后果尚未得到充分审视吗？还是因为这些后果无关紧要？在本文中，我将研究和讨论这些问题，重点关注这样一个事实：由于生态学著作可为许多其他生物学学科提供基础信息，它们在传播和放大各种概念和方法错误的数量方面发挥着关键作用。尽管被忽视和低估，但这个级联式过程源于影响假设和观点的琐碎分类学问题，但很快就会转变为一个深刻的实际问题，影响我们对自然的认识，以及生态系统的结构和功能以及人类医疗保健计划的效率。为了改善学科间的交流，我提出了一系列同行评审期刊应要求所有作者满足的具体要求，我还主张提供紧急的机构和资金支持，以重振整合分类学和生态学的科学标本馆的建设。
