As a growing number of species face extinction, both researchers and the general public tend to focus on attractive, well-known and charismatic fauna and flora. But what about the species that have disappeared from scientific recognition altogether?
Research published in our open-access journal Nature Conservation sheds light on how historic taxonomic errors and misinterpretations have led to the disappearance of many species from science’s radar, highlighting the crucial role that taxonomy and natural history collections (NHCs) can play in rediscovering and conserving biodiversity.
Research paper: ‘Lost species, neglected taxonomy, and the role of natural history collections and synonymization in the identification of the World’s forgotten biodiversity’ by Spartaco Gippoliti, Simone Farina and Franco Andreone.
Forgotten species and taxonomic inertia
Many species that were described long ago have been overlooked due to erroneous synonymisation, a process whereby one species is mistakenly classified under another’s name, generally because of the scarce number of specimens available. These species, the authors now refer to as ‘long-lost synonymised species,’ can fall out of awareness for decades, even centuries.
The 20th century saw a general trend of ‘lumping’ species together, reducing the number of recognised taxa, especially within well-known vertebrate groups. Taxonomic inertia – the persistence of outdated classifications – has caused many species to remain under-recognised, with their conservation statuses too often overlooked. This problem is described among better-known vertebrates, but is also likely present in some of the best studied invertebrates.
The importance of natural history collections
More than simply relics of the past, natural history collections provide a contemporary and essential resource for taxonomists working to untangle these historical errors. Museum specimens allow scientists to re-examine old classifications, using modern tools and methods to correct mistakes and uncover new taxa. Recent advances in ‘museomics’ – the study of genetic material from museum specimens – have opened new possibilities for species identification and conservation.
Such breakthroughs have led to the revalidation of the Neotropical genus Leopardus and the African wolf, Canis anthus, which had been synonymised for decades. Without natural history collections and the associated holotypes, the nomenclature of these species might have remained obscured, and their conservation needs unmet or delayed.
Natural History Collections and Museomics
Pensoft recently launched a new journal titled Natural History Collections and Museomics (NHCM).The publication comes at a pivotal moment in which taxonomists face the challenges of dwindling resources and fewer scientists entering the field. Through the publication of important open-access research, the journal aims to play a crucial role in bridging the gap between traditional taxonomy and modern conservation efforts.
Furthermore, by highlighting the essential role of taxonomy and natural history collections, NHCM will support the rediscovery of species long lost to science and help to conserve the world’s forgotten biodiversity. As the field of museomics grows, so too does the hope of rediscovering species that have been hidden in plain sight. The new journal already benefits from a competent and varied editorial board, including two of the authors of the Nature Conservation paper, Franco Andreone and Spartaco Gippoliti.
If the scientific community rally behind taxonomy and natural history collections, ensuring these vital tools are integrated into future biodiversity assessments, we can hope to preserve not just the species we know, but those we have forgotten.
Original source:
Gippoliti S, Farina S, Andreone F (2024) Lost species, neglected taxonomy, and the role of natural history collections and synonymization in the identification of the World’s forgotten biodiversity. Nature Conservation 56: 119-126. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.56.132036
