|
Event Horizon in Systematics Richard
H. Zander Res
Botanica March
23, 2003 |
|
Event
Horizon in Systematics This
year (2003) is the 250th anniversary of Linnaeus' Species Plantarum (1753).
Soon, 2008 will bring us to the 250th anniversary of Linnaeus' 10th ed. of
Systema Naturae. These early dates are the starting dates for most plant and
animal nomenclature for purposes of priority. In
250 years, we systematists have either discovered or mediated the generation
of billions of dollars in economic value and quality of life enhancements.
With the informational revolution, 250 years of discovery provide a
collection-based timeline demonstrating past environmental change with clear
value in dealing with present global crises in predicting future change. Over
the past 250 years, we have agreed with Linnaeus that a central aim is to
discover and name the world's biota. Any number of additional purposes
informed through a multiplicity of perceived problems and methods to solve
them have been attached to the Linnaean endeavor. The central activity,
however, based on Linnaean nomenclature, has always been amply demonstrated
as economically valuable and supportive of human needs in the long term. Most
of us are aware of a sea-change in support for systematics. This includes the
dissolution or centralization of collections and collections-based programs,
and the general turn to education as the primary function of institutions
with systematic programs. This is happening even at the Smithsonian (see
recent issue of Plant Press.) I
appreciate that short-term fixes are needed for critical problems, such as
recent suggestions on Taxacom of how to tell a dean that it is a
"mistake" to shut down a program because it can't be recreated
easily, especially if the collections are dispersed; and the phenomenal
message from NSF's Rodman to University of Nebraska about killing the goose
that lays the golden eggs. I
have, however, detected an "after me the global oceanic rise"
phenomenon where the event horizon for present systematists is the end of the
present grant, or retirement at best. This leaves posterity with not only a
smoking and desolate Earth, but also an empty ethic and no effective plan in
place. A
250-year plan might help. It would involve 10 generations (at 25 work years
each). I wonder what such a plan would look like, for the field in general or
for your institution in particular? Instead of going forward from 1 year
plans to 3 year plans, or at the most 5 or 10 year plans, we could work
backward to 100 year plans and 50 year plans (four generations and two
generations). If
250 years of discovery along Linnaean lines have been valuable for humankind,
and if many areas of the world and many groups of plants and animals are yet
poorly explored, should not another 250 years of similar work be equally
valuable? How might we plan that these years be spent, or will we leave a
legacy of anomie to the next 25 generations of students? Note: This essay was first submitted as a comment on
Taxacom, a listserver for systematics, March 19, 2003. Note: The 2003 Missouri Botanical Garden Symposium in
October will concern the Species Plantarum 250 year anniversary http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/research/symposium/welcome.shtml See also: http://www.systbot.uu.se/sp.pl/
for a similar celebration and lecture series in |
|
|