Meeting Abstract
DNA barcodes are a useful tool for identifying species, but are no substitute for descriptive taxonomy. We could turn all the paintings in the Louvre facing the wall, label the reverse of each canvas with a barcode, and accurately distinguish a da Vinci from a Caravaggio, but to what end? Without the unique subject, colors, and composition of such works of art, who cares which is which? Similarly, unless we have knowledge of the characters that make each species unique and reveal their phylogenetic relationships, we miss the most interesting aspects of biodiversity. Like a mapping Mars, a description is a first necessary step toward deep scientific understanding. But in taxonomy, descriptions are more. Species descriptions are not verbal accounts of what organisms look like, but collections of hypotheses about homology. Vertebrates share a backbone, yet the vertebral column of a gerbil and giraffe are visually quite different. Species descriptions, done well, are thus a rich assemblage of rigorously testable hypotheses and, ultimately, the path by which we understand the origins and history of biodiversity. Benefits of describing all species are several. Conservation biologists can measure biodiversity lost or saved. Ecologists can study ecosystems in much greater depth. Entrepreneurs can create a sustainable future through biomimetics, inspired by the adaptations of species. We can tell the story of the origins and history of biodiversity through the fascinating and improbable attributes of species. And we can discover our own humanity by seeing ourselves in phylogenetic context. Before millions of species, biomimetic models, and evidence of evolutionary history are lost, it should be a top priority to complete a global census and description of all species, placing each in its phylogenetic context and mapping its geographic and ecological distributions.
