MikeLigalig.com

It has been said that taxonomy is dead, and yet there is much about biological systematics that is simply taken for granted. The present regime in biological taxonomy (at least for more complex forms of life) is to arrange living creatures in accordance with the best information available regarding their natural history (the so-called “tree of life”). Typically this constitutes some traditional comparative anatomy, but with increasing deference to biochemical analyses, and in particular the results DNA hybridization experiments. The assumption underlying this approach is that affinities between biological organisms are best adjudicated and understood according to the degree of relatedness, or the most recent common ancestral organism (either postulated or discovered). Rather than working to corroborate evolutionary theory, contemporary taxonomy exists largely to prop it up as though natural history was an end in itself.

Natural history is one very revealing perspective on the organization of life; where you come from says a lot about where you presently are. However it is a retrospective view of life and historical relationships sometimes distort present relationships and the relative significance of the two. To cite an avian example, there is something odd about associating flamingos and grebes together (Hackett SJ et al. 2008. A Phylogenomic Study of Birds Reveals Their Evolutionary History. Science 320: 1763-1768) more closely than, say, grebes and other swimming/diving birds.

An alternative taxonomy (in some ways the more traditional taxonomy) might promote present ecological similarities between organisms and minimize genealogical relationships. Such would be a progressive taxonomy with ecology as its organizing principle. This approach would have certain advantages over the current status quo, for instance it would be more intuitive, and would focus more on current affinities, rather than historical ones.

Decisions regarding taxonomy, and the organizational principles behind them, depend largely on convention which in turn depend on our biases and predilections or (perhaps more optimistically) the values and objectives behind our inquiry. It is worth reflecting on these things from time to time.

Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=36607.0