Memorandum submitted by Plantlife International
Plantlife, the UK's leading charity working
to protect wild plants and their habitats, sincerely welcomes
the timely follow-up inquiry on systematic biology research and
taxonomy by the House of Lords Committee on Science and Technology.
In particular, we are greatly concerned by the persistent lack
of skills and information relating to lower plants and fungi and
welcome all moves to redress this situation. Plantlife's submission
to the Committee focuses on the state of affairs in Systematics
and Taxonomy as it relates to fungi and lower plants, unless otherwise
stated.
In summary, Plantlife believes there is a lack
of taxonomical expertise that is accessible to government, conservationists
and education establishments. This problem will be exacerbated
as the retirement of a large proportion of current experts is
imminent. Insufficient funding for training in order to support
the training of new skilled mycologists and lichenologists, as
well as scarce funding for systematics and taxonomic research
in general, further compounds the issue. Plantlife believes the
situation amounts to a crisis, particularly in mycology.
With regard to the collation and management
of taxonomic data, Plantlife believes that a separate review is
necessary. With rapid technological advances matched both by the
increases in demand for taxonomic data and potential sources of
such data, we regard a new look at best practise models to be
urgently required.
Question 1. What is the state of systematics
research and taxonomy in the UK? What are the current research
priorities? What are the barriers, if any, to delivering these
priorities?
1. Plantlife believes that, in general,
there is lack of taxonomical expertise that is accessible to government,
conservationists and education establishments. We are particularly
concerned by the situation with respect to lower plants and fungi.
2. Plantlife understands that within Universities
in the UK there is little taxonomic research on lichens, and only
a small amount of ad hoc research on macro fungi undertaken at
Liverpool John Moores and the University of Cardiff. For lichens,
taxonomy and systematics research is undertaken as part of the
job of two staff members at the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh
(RBG Edinburgh), one staff member at the National Museums and
Galleries of Wales, Cardiff, and one person at the Natural History
Museum, South Kensington. Meanwhile, no one in Wales has a specific
remit for such research relating to fungi, whilst elsewhere in
the country, and only as a part of their jobs, there is just one
person working on research in Scotland, a very small team (two
staff and two support staff) at the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew
(RBG Kew), and three at CABI Biosciences (the latter two institutions
providing a world-wide service and with confirmed plans to consolidate
activities and staff at RBG Kew). A limited number of specialists
also offer consultancy work in this area.
3. Research priorities within conservation-based
organisations are dictated by available funds that, at present,
are almost exclusively linked to Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)
species and those receiving statutory protection. Furthermore,
in order to gain sufficient funding for a project of British national
value—such as the updating of a checklist or the creation
of primers to help identify the mycelium of a fungus that occurs
nation-wide—researchers may have to make a number of applications
to a number of different bodies as no single source of dedicated
funding that is sufficiently resourced exists. The lack of any
long-term certainty over research funds compounds the problem.
In this context, programmes commenced tend to stall before they
can be completed.
4. Plantlife believes that the current research
priorities regarding all plants and fungi involve:
— resolving outstanding taxonomic issues
regarding threatened flora in order to inform and facilitate conservation
efforts
— confirming that taxa considered endemic
to Britain really are distinct species. This work has stalled
at least on lower plants and requires more significant funding,
for example, PhD studentships;
— increasing understanding of within-species
diversity as a prerequisite to conserving it.
In addition, priorities for fungi-specific research
are:
— combined molecular and morphological
resolution of priority taxonomic issues to refine our measures
of diversity;
— the design of species-specific primers
for the detection of rare and threatened species;
— increased understanding of the hidden
fungal diversity, distribution and links between it and other
taxa diversity.
Question 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?
5. Systematics and taxonomy research identifies
discrete biological entities and provides the tools such as identification
guides ("floras") to enable the recognition of these
entities. Taxonomists also offer an invaluable service in determining
the identity of problematic material and assist in the production
of reference collections that are invaluable in resolving the
identity of critical material. Having collected together distribution
data from this identification process, conservation priorities
can be developed, in particular through the process of "Red
Listing". These Red Lists identify those species of conservation
concern and help inform the development and implementation of
protective legislation such as Schedule 8 of the Wildlife &
Countryside Act, the notification of Sites of Special Scientific
Interest, and the designation of National Nature Reserves. An
insecure nomenclature could make the legislation unenforceable.
6. Identifications need also to be accurate.
Currently, the learned societies offer a panel of referees willing
to examine material relating to flowering plants, ferns, stoneworts,
mosses, liverworts and lichens. This is mostly a voluntary process
and for some genera a number of years may pass before a referee
has time to check a specimen. Some referees are based in institutions
where only a small amount of time may be allowed for such work.
Plantlife considers this very unsatisfactory and believes additional
central funding should be made available to these institutions
in order that they may fund a proper service. The small number
of professional taxonomists is also largely responsible for the
initial training of voluntary referees. If we are to rely on voluntary
societies, resources need to be made available to support and
sustain these activities. RBG Kew, the National Museums and Galleries
of Wales, Cardiff and RBG Edinburgh all provide a limited identification
service, but would soon be overwhelmed by demand if this service
were advertised. Plantlife does not consider systematics and taxonomy
research to be adequately funded at present.
7. Understanding the functioning of ecosystems
and their conservation or commercial exploitation is largely impossible
if the individual taxonomic units from which they are constructed
cannot be recognised. A clear understanding of evolutionary relationships
of species can also provide important information as to how their
populations may be managed appropriately. For example, the Cruciferae
(cress family of flowering plants) do not normally form relationships
with mycorrhizal fungi in their roots. In consequence they appear
less susceptible to the effects of nutrient enrichment of their
environment than, for instance, a member of the Fagaceae (oak
and beech family), which appear to be highly dependent on such
fungi and perform poorly in nutrient-rich situations.
8. Without a secure and widely accepted
taxonomic base, biological data recording would become confused
and unworkable. Checklists are an invaluable aid to stabilising
the use of names. For plants and fungi the production and maintenance
of checklists is haphazard at best. Indeed, Plantlife believes
that the production and maintenance of these fundamental tools
should not be left to chance and the efforts of mostly voluntary
societies. Recognising this problem, the Botanical Society of
the British Isles has recently set up a voluntary panel to review
taxonomic developments and maintain a website with a comprehensive
synonomised checklist. This model might be repeated within the
other Societies with grant aid provided as an inducement. The
alternative strategy is to provide ring-fenced funds to a particular
institution charged with the maintenance of such lists and guided
by a consultative panel. It is clear that the current situation
is not sustainable. For example, the British lichen checklist
is largely the work of one man, carried out mostly in his spare
time. Dr Brian Coppins of RBG Edinburgh maintains the list that
is available on the web. He is, however approaching retirement
age and there is no obvious successor in any other British institution.
9. From time to time there are disagreements
over interpretation. Unresolved taxonomic interpretations can
lead to confusion during planning decisions, statutory designation
or prosecution. There is at present no clear mechanism for establishing
a consensus. Of even greater concern to Plantlife is the fact
that the skills base in the UK is so depleted that creating a
panel to establish consensus would be difficult without recruiting
assistance from abroad. On the retirement of Dr Coppins in the
next two years the skill gap will be such in lichens that a professional
replacement is unlikely to be found. The Natural History Museum,
which has traditionally trained staff to a level where the production
of checklists and the provision of nomenclatural advice was seen
as part of their job, appears to pursue contracts around the world
to secure funds and is the consumer not provider of this sort
of support.
10. The situation within the rest of the
fungus kingdom is even more unsatisfactory. The Ascomycete checklist
has not been updated for 23 years. Until recently the Basidiomycete
checklist was over 40 years out of date. Although this checklist
was updated in 2005, this was only possible because RBG Kew took
the lead with this work with outstanding contributions from experts
who gave their time in a voluntary capacity. Only a small amount
of grant aid was available from conservation agencies, adding
to Plantlife's concerns that the importance of taxomony and systematics
research is not reflected in current funding processes. Unfortunately
funds could not be found to ensure that the checklist is maintained
and updated.
11. In brief, without the ability to identify
species correctly, research and conservation projects may be compromised.
Although the use of genetic markers is a useful way forward, it
depends on taxonomic expertise and the availability of good collections.
Plantlife believes there is a potential misunderstanding that
genetic barcoding may be used to resolve the UK's current taxonomic
impediment.
Question 3. Does the way in which systematics
research is organised and co-ordinated best meet the needs of
the user community? What progress has been made in setting up
a body to lead on this? What contribution do the leading systematics
research institutions make both nationally and internationally?
12. There remains no methodical organisation
behind systematics research. What coordination exists is provided
largely through the voluntary effort of individuals mediated by
conservation bodies and learned societies. For example, Plantlife
coordinates and services the Fungus Conservation Forum consisting
of voluntary and learned societies and statutory organisations.
The Forum has developed a UK Fungi Strategy and offers a platform
for inter-institutional discussion on taxonomic study. Plant Link
(PLINK—the forum for all organisations with an interest
in plant conservation) and its Welsh and Scottish committees,
each have representatives from the major taxonomic research institutes
and have, or are now developing, strategic plans that involve
elements of taxonomic and systematics research
13. Some of the major taxonomic institutions
such as the National Museum of Wales no longer have advisory panels.
This is regrettable as these panels allowed an exchange of views
regarding priorities between organisations. It is to be hoped
that, provided funds persist to support PLINKCymru, this alternative
forum may partly meet this need.
Question 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?
14. With the caveat noted above in Paragraph
11, DNA sequencing has permitted for the first time the recognition
of the important role fungi play in most ecosystems. Most plants
and animals have formed mutualistic associations with fungi, whilst
nutrient cycles and the control of pests and pathogens are effected
by the presence of beneficial fungi. Traditional identification
methods to identify theses fungi are of limited value and there
is an urgent need to equip the existing, though limited, research
facilities so as to improve our understanding of this fundamental
ecosystem process and the range of new taxa that sequencing has
identified. The current widespread use of artificial fertilizers
threatens life-supporting fungi. It is, therefore, of vital importance
we are able to describe and conserve this newly discovered genetic
diversity.
15. Sequencing has also led to considerable
taxonomic instability and has forced a radical review in particular
of generic and higher relationships. Some traditional taxonomists
reliant on morphology and chromosomes have found the use of genomics
difficult to embrace. The instability of names is problematic
and Plantlife fears it may dissuade people from taking up an interest
in the identification of plants and fungi. It is therefore imperative
that every support should be offered to those willing to accept
the challenge. Plantlife recommends the development of an apprentice
scheme akin to that already trialed with much success in Scotland.
Question 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?
16. The quality and accessibility of the
taxonomic data collated varies greatly between species groups,
and Plantlife believes that taxonomic collections are not being
used to their maximum potential. Maintenance of good-quality data
requires considerable resources. Additional resources are urgently
needed in order to capture electronically all the data held regarding
herbarium specimens in British institutions and make them available
via the National Biodiversity Network (NBN). Some herbaria such
as Liverpool have electronic databases of the data taken from
the labels of all their specimen, but many do not. At the National
Museum of Wales, for example, only recently curated specimens
are logged electronically. There are no resources to clear the
backlog. Plantlife considers it unacceptable that it is now more
desirable to deposit important plant and fungus specimens in overseas
institutions, where the data is made immediately accessible via
the web, than in some UK institutions where data is less easily
accessed.
17. Plantlife believes that the current
state of national and local recording schemes and the management
of the data they generate (namely their provision on the web at
a usable scale) should be the subject of a separate review. With
rapid technological advances matched both by the increases in
demand for taxonomic data and potential sources of such data,
Plantlife believes that a new look at best practise models is
urgently required.
18. The situation in Wales provides a good
example of some of the issues. Four local record centres have
been established to cover the entire country. A consortium of
users funds the collection and dissemination of data and the sale
of data is a significant part of their financial support. At the
same time a number of organisations including the Botanical Society
of the British Isles, The British Lichen Society, the British
Mycological Society and the Association of British Fungal Groups
have all resolved to create their own separate British national
databases; some working in partnership with the NBN Trust. All
of these organisations are now competing for scarce resources
to assist in data input and system support with no clearly defined
overall plan. The recorders of biological data are left to decide
for themselves which system they will support and no one system
any longer has a comprehensive data set. Quality control issues
also arise.
19. The NBN provides a useful "library"
through which datasets can be made available. However, the development
of species dictionaries has been slow and Plantlife believes too
little consideration has been given to the impact of taxonomic
change on records. As an example, the species dictionary in Recorder
(the most widely used biological recording database) became years
out of date. This will now necessitate a large amount of work
to resolve records of species split into more than one entity
where one of the new entities retains the old name. Furthermore,
there are examples of name swaps between species. In such cases,
the true identity of a record can only be ascertained if an accurate
date for the name change is known or the date at which the maker
of the record took up the change. The process for deciding when,
or whether, a proposed change in taxonomy will be adopted by Recorder
remains undefined. The development of a global biodiversity information
network will require considerable work as it necessitates the
construction of synonomy lists and species dictionaries that go
beyond the borders of the British Isles.
Question 8. What is the role of the major
regional museums and collections? How are taxonomic collections
curated and funded?
20. Regional museums have played a pivotal
role in improving botanical taxonomic skills. Without lichenologists
in RBG Edinburgh and Cardiff, lichenology would have floundered
in Great Britain. The three British-trained lichenologists based
in these institutions provide an important service in the identification
of critical specimens and have resolved numerous taxonomic problems.
Their collections are well curated and accessible (although the
working facilities in Cardiff are extremely small). The staff
lead workshops and field meetings and provide essential support
to a small but active band of amateur lichenologists. They also
provide important support to the country conservation agencies.
21. Whilst RBG Kew attempts to fill the
skills gap in fungus taxonomy, their small staff combined with
a worldwide remit means little specialist support is available
to a country such as Wales. The merging of this team with the
CABI specialists will not increase the number of experts available.
Scotland has not recovered from the loss of its mycologist at
RBG Edinburgh. Staff in these regional centres have been pivotal
in the ongoing revision of the British Lichen Flora. This essential
tool had become seriously out of date. Its revision has only been
possible by the use of retired one-time professional lichenologists
and much amateur help. Unless additional resources are found for
these institutions to take on the work of keeping this standard
flora up to date, it is very unlikely, given the age profile of
the current participants and existing work programmes of those
few remaining professional lichenologists, that any new edition
could be contemplated in the foreseeable future.
Question 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?
22. The learned botanical and mycological
societies have embarked on the development of websites for taxonomy
alongside the NBN. Plantlife believes these sites could offer
essential information such as checklists, synonomy lists, conservation
evaluations and distributional data as well as supporting the
means of accurate identification of species. At present, there
are insufficient resources to set up such websites.
Question 10. What needs to be done to ensure
that web-based taxonomy information is of high quality, reliable
and user-friendly?
23. Plantlife believes that there needs
to be a strategic review of data collection and management, and
their dissemination on the internet.
Question 11. How does the taxonomic community
engage with the non-taxonomic community? What role do field studies
play?
24. The main means of engagement of the
taxonomic community with the field-based community is through
publications and meetings run by the learned societies. The Botanical
Society of the British Isles, British Bryological Society, British
Lichen Society, British Mycological Society and the Association
of British Fungus Groups all hold indoor and outdoor workshop
meetings where taxonomic skills can be transferred. Within Wales
informal field meetings of amateurs and professionals who wish
to improve identification skills are held in addition to formal
meetings. Plantlife assists in their organisation as well as coordinating
the PLINK groups at UK and country level. These groups provide
regular, albeit limited, opportunities for both communities to
engage on these and similar issues. Many of the specialist Societies
offer small grants to help less fortunate members attend such
meetings. A more structured approach offering financial support
in the purchase of identification guides, microscopes and the
wherewithal to transfer records electronically to central databases
is highly desirable.
Question 12. What are the numbers and ages
of trained taxonomists working in UK universities and other organisations?
25. In general, the issue remains that an
aging body of taxonomic specialists, especially with regard to
lower plants and fungi, is not being replaced let alone developed.
The Basidiomycete project described in Paragraph 10 was exceptionally
fortunate in securing the talents of N.W. Legon as the paid senior
author, but he has now left RBG Kew to seek employment outside
this field. Other key participants in the project have either
retired or are likely to do so in the next few years. There appears
to be no strategy within RBG Kew for the transfer of skills of
trained staff approaching retirement. In consequence fungus taxonomy
in Britain appears to be facing a major crisis.
26. Plantlife is extremely concerned by
the persistence of the gulf between the need for taxonomic expertise
and the resources being supplied to ensure the continuity of such
expertise. The problem arises both from a lack of funding and
a lack of training, especially as the latter may take many years
before expertise is achieved. This issue may be illustrated by
the experience of RBG Edinburgh where, seven years after the retirement
of a mycologist of international repute, no replacement had been
recruited.
27. Efforts to redress this situation have
been instigated, for example the British Lichen Society lichen
apprenticeship scheme in Scotland (part funded by Scottish Natural
Heritage) provided training to seven individuals over three years,
but current needs outweigh such initiatives to date. Funding for
training is a high priority.
28. It is noticeable that in those institutions
and subject areas where foreign trained staff have had to be employed
due to a lack of any suitable British applicants, their skills
transfer has been far less successful and almost without exception
they have made little impact on the British scene.
Question 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?
29. There remains little capacity to train
young potential taxonomists. This problem is fuelled by the lack
of experts in lower plants and fungi and is compounded by their
imminent retirement. Apprentices must be recruited quickly, and
it is possible that it will be necessary to seek them from overseas.
30. The urgent need for an action plan to
address the need for plant and fungal skills and expertise in
the UK has been recognised in the progress report (2007) of the
Plant Diversity Challenge.
4 February 2008
| 
