Memorandum submitted by the Hertfordshire
Natural History Society
SUMMARY
1. Systematics and taxonomy are under funded
and the requirement for these skills when dealing with the big
questions of today, is under estimated. In particular, the role
of taxonomy relating to biodiversity issues and climate change
(neither of which can be dealt with without large input from these
disciplines) is unappreciated.
2. Much of the expertise in species recording
comes from amateurs, many of whom are in the older age spectrum.
County Recorders take on much of this work on a voluntary basis,
feeding the information to local (usually County) Biological Records
Centers and to National Recorders. Centers of excellence for systematics
and taxonomy such as the Natural History Museum and Kew Gardens
also utilize the skills of amateurs.
3. Schools and universities no longer cover
taxonomic skills in any detail, and little is covered at undergraduate
level. There are few young people being trained in these skills,
which will leave us with an impoverished national skills base.
4. There is a requirement for greater government
commitment to this area of research and skills development. In
particular this commitment must be a long term commitment if government
seriously wishes to turn things round. Government should not make
a commitment in this area based on new technology alone. Much
of the applications at the molecular level being suggested have
been over-estimated and will not prove useful for many decades.
2. What is the role of systematics and taxonomy
and, in particular, in what way do they contribute to research
areas such as biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services and
climate change?
How important is this contribution and how is
it recognised in the funding process?
How is systematics integrated in other areas of
research?
The role is vital. If you can't identify and
distinguish what you have, how can you begin to talk about biodiversity?
It's not a "sexy" area of research for funding- unless
one is looking at the molecular level. The contribution of taxonomy
is vital and strangely undervalued. We have very few taxonomists
in the UK and even fewer coming through. A couple of years ago
I worked with colleagues at the University of Lodz in Poland on
Leonardo da Vinci project (over an 18 month period) to bring 21
Masters graduates to the UK for a period of 6 months for work
experience. Many of them were employed because they could identify
to species level, a range of organisms (especially plants, freshwater
and terrestrial invertebrates). In Poland they maintain a classical
education and science graduates doing botany or zoology have good
identification skills. Several of them have gained permanent employment
here because of their taxonomic skills—far ahead of our
own graduates. In Poland they still have departments of Evolutionary
Science, and commonly employ 30 botanists within a department.
As to integration with other research—well
taxonomic skills are essential for any conservation and any biodiversity
project. Many of us view BAPs as being incomplete because we know
that only those species well studied are included. For example,
the National BAP mentions only 3 freshwater invertebrates, the
southern damselfly, freshwater pearl mussel and the native crayfish.
Yet in my own specialism I know that the trichoptera (caddis)
have at least 7 listed as RDB1 species (Red Data Book species,
RDB1 are those species listed by the IUCN as being critically
endangered), one of which is almost certainly extinct! This group
is not mentioned in any BAP in the UK. We therefore underestimate
threats to many species, often because locally and nationally,
there are few people able to identify and record certain groups.
With regards to climate change, there will be species that could
prove to be excellent indicators of change, but do we have the
people who can actually recognize them?
4. What level of funding would be needed to
meet the need for taxonomic information now and in the future?
Who should be providing this funding?
If government is serious about biodiversity,
global change, system services etc. then government should fund
it. Unfortunately any funding is likely to get lost in molecular
research rather than taxonomic support.
6. What impact have developments in DNA sequencing,
genomics and other new technologies had on systematics research?
In what way has systematics embraced new technologies
and how can these research areas interact successfully and efficiently?
Great advances are being made in the molecular
field, but we still have to ask what's happened to the field taxonomic
skills that are essential tools in conservation, biodiversity
etc. These have been neglected. At the molecular level there are
some well funded projects but this area is over emphasised. Recent
progress suggests that in the future there is scope for molecular
identification in the field. However, one has to know what one
actually has first! If it doesn't have a name how do you know
what you have (apart from a DNA code)? These developments are
very many years away from realisation, and we will still need
systematics & taxonomic skills to make sense of the information.
DATA COLLECTION,
MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE
AND DISSEMINATION
7. Does the way in which taxonomic data is
collected, managed and maintained best meet the needs of the user
community?
What is the state of local and national recording
schemes?
Collected primarily by local County recorders.
Fed to the local Biological records center and / or to National
Recorders. Some specialist recording carried out, eg national
survey for bumble bees or dragonflies. Some Counties publish information/records
for particular groups and there are national publications (Birds
in particular with the National Atlas). Not all recorders are
keeping their records in electronic format. We are currently trying
to get all our recorders to put their records into electronic
formats and to lodge copies with the local BRC. National Biodiversity
Network (NBN) is great, but still evolving and deserves more support.
As chair of a county recorders group, I have to say that the state
of local & national recording schemes is patchy. Some groups
are well recorded such as birds, butterflies and dragonflies—others
may not even have someone within the county able to identify certain
groups—so these are omitted. Don't forget this work is all
voluntary. County Biological Records Centers are being downgraded
in many areas and many of their records come from their County
Recorders. County Natural History Society recorder lists (the
level where most recording is done) are variable. A quick look
at a few web sites illustrates the problem. London Natural History
Society has 15 recorders with 2 vacancies and 2 recorders also
record for Hertfordshire. Hertfordshire has 28 recorders. Essex
lists no County recorders, nor does Oxford or Cambridge, although
for instance Oxford has rare plant recording within its society.
Bedfordshire record 20 groups. Yorkshire Naturalists Union, list
17 groups that they record.
8. What is the role of the major regional
museums and collections?
How are taxonomic collections curated and funded?
The role of museums and collections is vital.
May be the only places we can look at specimens to confirm identification.
No idea as to funding—but had visitors over from Kenya last
summer, one of whom helped put the Natural History Museum's collection
of Lake Victoria's cichlid fish in taxonomic order. They had been
neglected and were out of date because they were no longer a key
interest of the current curator. Would indicate that not all groups,
even important ones, have the right level of resources.
9. What progress has been made in developing
a web-based taxonomy?
How do such initiatives fit in with meeting demand
for systematics and taxonomy information?
How do UK-led initiatives fit in with international
initiatives and is there sufficient collaboration?
A few basic keys available. For my own work
we are fortunate to have the FBA (Freshwater Biological Association)
text keys for freshwater organisms in the UK. Some electronic
keys are now being developed, but those I have tested are not
what I would use day to day as they have not been shown to be
particularly user friendly. Potential for electronic keys in this
area from some groups but may not be suitable for all. Feel that
there is a push to make short cuts which does away with the underpinning
knowledge in this suggestion. Photographs are great in matching
what you have with what's on a screen, but some still require
microscope skills and knowledge of a taxonomic group's morphology.
10. What needs to be done to ensure that web-based
taxonomy information is of high quality, reliable and user-friendly?
A good dichotomous key using high resolution
photographs showing / confirming the key features. For those who
of us who use a microscope, see little likelihood of replacing
text version.
11. How does the taxonomic community engage
with the non-taxonomic community? What role do field studies play?
Field studies, ecology field trips are especially
valuable. They train people in the correct sampling and collection
methods and in identification skills. Only learn by doing and
this type of skill needs constant reinforcing. As to engaging
with the non taxonomic community, I do this mainly with students.
Some Counties run a program of field days for particular groups
of organism for the general public and our county (Hertfordshire
Natural History Society) we are also keen to encourage new members
(especially younger members) to participate. Recorders are often
happy to act as mentors- however, the uptake is disappointing.
SKILLS BASE
12. What are the numbers and ages of trained
taxonomists working in UK universities and other organisations?
Within in my institution, University of Hertfordshire,
there are now only 3, two over 50 years in age and one over 60.
For the Hertfordshire Natural History Society recorders group,
2 are in their 30's the majority are over 50, a few in their late
60's and a couple over 70. No sign of younger members coming through.
13. What is the state of training and education
in systematics and taxonomy? Are there any gaps in capacity? Is
the number of taxonomists in post, and those that are being trained,
sufficient to meet current and future needs across all taxonomic
subject areas?
At undergraduate level there is little taxonomy
taught. Some at Masters level. The majority of students studying
biological / ecological subjects as undergraduates no longer know,
or can name the body parts of a plant or insect. They may have
briefly touched on it at GCSE, if we are lucky, but the majority
cannot remember it.
At our institution we have no "taxonomist"
in post. I am employed as an ecologist—but not all ecologists
have taxonomic skills. So the state of training is dire. Even
if we did train them up, there is no career structure in place!
4 February 2008
| 
