House of Lords - Science and Technology

Select Committee on Science and Technology Minutes of Evidence

Memorandum by the Natural History Museum

The Natural History Museum (NHM) is one of the world's leading institutions for systematics and taxonomy. The expertise of its scientists and its natural history collections are the international focus for integrated research on the natural world, provision of collections access to many scientists, development and provision of information resources and education and public engagement. Its broad role as a museum is inseparable from its science: it enables the NHM to take innovative approaches to public engagement in science and the natural world. It combines skills and pursues collaboration to meet constantly changing needs for taxonomy around the world and welcomes this opportunity to discuss the future of taxonomy and systematics.

The NHM science mission is to explore the diversity of the natural world and the processes that generate such diversity.

SUMMARY

— The UK has international centres of excellence (both in collections and research) that are providing international leadership for the future of taxonomy and systematics.

— Responses to the biodiversity crisis and to the challenge of climate change, require a transformation in the nature and volume of taxonomy that will require resources and effective development of international strategy. This must develop "industrial scale" acquisition and analysis of taxonomic data. There are great opportunities and challenges for systematic biology and taxonomy, as for other areas of science, but the UK taxonomic community can develop to meet these challenges, collaborating in international networks.

— There has never been a time when so many theoretical and practical tools have been available, coupled with potential for enhanced access to collections. While the NHM is consistently supported by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), resources across the sector for taxonomy and systematics in the UK, are at best level in real terms and the community will be unable to meet the challenges of new technology and expanding need without adequately resourced strategic development.

— A critical mass of taxon-focused expertise, must be maintained to complement the expanding range of technology, but there is increasing concentration of systematic work in just three organisations (two devoted to plants alone) as activity in UK universities and research institutes declines.

— The NHM is responding to the opportunities by providing leadership in the vision of the future of systematics and in exploiting new technology; integration of DNA and morphological approaches, image capture and analysis, and taxonomy on the web. These advances are often limited to exploration in pilot mode: greater resources would be needed to scale up to the level needed by stakeholders.

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. The UK is well positioned in development of taxonomy and systematics research, with a core of high-profile institutions and access to good quality infrastructure in the form of collections. There is little difficulty in recruitment of overseas expertise, but there is concern that opportunities in a small number of UK institutions will not support the development of the UK expertise that will be needed to meet future demands. The ongoing transformation of taxonomy means that the infrastructure will come under increasing pressure to deliver within current resources.

The state of research

2. Taxonomy is in a state of change—the extent of knowledge of diversity needed for understanding of ecosystems is immense, requiring new perspectives on research and changing responsibilities and requirements for lead institutions. We need to maintain core competencies on knowledge of taxa while collaborating internationally and fostering the development of research, research scientists and infrastructures for a new taxonomy.

3. Taxonomy comprises three complementary elements[1]: description, identification, and phylogenetic systematics. Their states in the UK and overseas differ, but phylogenetic systematics is strong, with continuing impact on comparative biology, opening up new lines of enquiry in evolution, ecology and development. It is popularly seen as having higher status than the other elements of taxonomy as an academic discipline and is well represented in universities.

4. There is concern for the future of descriptive taxonomy, which does not fit easily into policy definitions of hypothesis-driven research in the UK, and has therefore been seen as less appropriate for competitive research funding. The continuing fertility of phylogenetic systematics as part of the wider enterprise of biological science depends on descriptive taxonomy. Descriptive taxonomy is modernising, enabling taxonomists to collaborate effectively and giving better access to data, wider availability of new technology and more direct engagement with end users.

5. Identification is used in ecology, conservation, quarantine, biomedicine, agriculture, invasive species management—and by the public. National user-needs assessments for the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Global Taxonomy Initiative (GTI) make identification a priority; the scale and diversity of international demand is significant. We anticipate revolutions in DNA barcoding and automatic identification that will enable more rapid and responsive characterisation of diversity; these will need a continued engagement with descriptive taxonomy.

6. Debate continues on describing and delimiting taxa—current processes cannot deliver information in time to be used to address the biodiversity crisis. It may be that the current formal approach will be confined to taxa where precise delimitation and naming is required; leaving the majority of species described "informally" to serve pragmatic approaches.

7. The Third National Reports to the CBD[2] suggest lack of taxonomic expertise is an issue on a global basis, with little being done to change this in many countries. Statistics[3] from the rapidly growing journal Zootaxa indicate patterns in descriptive taxonomy on a global basis, with larger numbers of authors from China, Brazil, the USA and Australia.

8. The NHM assessed UK taxonomic needs for conservation[4] in 2006 in its role as UK focal point for the GTI, and developed a database[5] on UK expertise (primarily description and identification) in 2002. In addition to taxonomic coverage and employers, the data[6] indicate the population of taxonomists: 1.6 per cent aged 21-30; 18 per cent 31-40; 27 per cent 41-50; 27 per cent 51-60; and 20 per cent over 60. 82 per cent were male.

9. The NHM has received good support from DCMS in recent years—the science group receives a relatively constant proportion of the budget and maintains a constant number of science staff. There has been very substantial capital investment in collections facilities over the past ten years. However, as the science undertaken by the Museum becomes more diverse, a smaller proportion of the resource is expended on descriptive taxonomy. This is a difficult but deliberate decision.

Research priorities

10. Research priorities must be linked to the scale of the challenge for biodiversity conservation and responses to climate change. We need better understanding of ecosystem services and the diversity that underpins them; taxonomy is an essential element within this enterprise, but with its core strengths it must develop and integrate new research to generate knowledge on the scale needed.

11. NHM, within the EU-funded EDIT[7] network, recently led on development of a vision for the future of taxonomy. The research priorities for taxonomy, in wide-ranging engagement with other areas of science, emerging from this vision include:

— Developing a credible tree of life, including evolutionary change and the processes of speciation.

— Expanding biodiversity discovery to micro-organisms, using molecular tools to transform scale and speed.

— Incorporating taxonomic information in modelling impacts of environmental change on biodiversity.

— An ecosystem approach based on taxonomy and metagenomics for describing life on earth.

12. On a UK scale, the recent NERC Science Theme Report on Biodiversity[8] says "Systematics and taxonomy are essential underpinning for any work on biodiversity. There are a number of challenges and opportunities for systematic biology including e-science, DNA barcoding, and providing increased human capacity to reverse declining taxonomic expertise." NERC is currently consulting on implementation. Other organisations set out objectives for research on biodiversity and ecology with implicit reliance on taxonomic research, tools and information systems[9]: there are ambitions to investigate biodiversity at different scales and ecosystem function, often using new analytical and information technology, but not always an understanding of what taxonomy can or should deliver.

Barriers to delivery:

13. Parts of taxonomy will move to massive sequencing and other data capture, massive output and analysis and high throughput identifications. This will require integrated teams, which will require a change in the systems for the assignment and evaluation of scientific products. Greater cohesion will enable the community to exploit the excitement, vitality and dynamism of the subject.

14. Facilities are needed to scale up taxonomy; high throughput DNA sequencing; biodiversity informatics development; storage of frozen samples. There is a need for funds for infrastructure development in the same way as has happened for genome sequencing and discovery.

15. Digitising data for wider access is at best receiving level funding and is in competition with other activitie;: it is done at too small a scale to meet future needs. The immense volume of existing analogue data can only be transformed with sustained resourcing.

16. Taxonomy is international science; thus those responsible for UK science policy need to be more closely connected to international initiatives and discussion on biodiversity and taxonomy—in for example, the Consortium for the Barcoding of Life (CBoL); the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF); the EU Lifewatch; and others. Taxonomy requires policy engagement in the same way as climate change but Defra for example, has consistently struggled to fund the UK GBIF subscription and has depended on support from the NHM and others.

17. Various national regulations related to CBD can consume resources available to research. International agreement on facilitation of collaborative academic research must be pursued: if not by the UK government then via the EU.

18. A new vision for the discipline includes continuing development of core strengths for research to expand the knowledge of organisms. However, there are concerns that the quality and value of taxonomy is not easily captured by science policy metrics and that there can be adverse career impacts; this possible barrier is being examined by the NHM and other institutions as a policy issue.

19. A significant disincentive for academics to engage in systematic research, particularly taxonomy, in universities, is the lack of credit given to many aspects of their work. The RAE emphasis on high impact journals and the low weighting given to measures of esteem in some units of assessment (in which contributions to databases and expertise might be recognised) mitigates against universities recruiting systematists. Furthermore, systematics, like other minority disciplines, tends to be marginalised in funding boards where voting takes place for prioritisation.

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?

20. Taxonomy enables diversity to be described and understood. Research on biodiversity, ecosystem services and climate change will rely on taxonomy in investigating diversity, monitoring changes, and modelling vulnerability; policy-makers need information that is underpinned by taxonomy; capacity building and training involve taxonomic expertise; public initiatives and engagement routinely involve taxonomy. In some areas taxonomy is active and involved, in others the potential is emerging.

21. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) said "A major obstacle to knowing (and therefore valuing), preserving, sustainably using and using equitably the benefits of the biodiversity of a region is the human and institutional capacity to research a country's biota." [10] Similarly GTI: "The lack of taxonomists, of collections, of libraries, of field guides and other identification aids, the difficulty in accessing information, coupled with the overwhelming number of species, both described and undescribed, make up the `taxonomic impediment' to implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity." [11]

22. NHM research explores natural diversity; what organisms exist and how they interact; where they are; and how diversity changes and develops. This work integrates taxonomy with other areas of research. Our research framework[12] summarises the wider scientific questions to which taxonomy contributes in the Museum or through collaboration. The UK has many specimens not represented in collections of countries of origin, holds literature inaccessible elsewhere and has a high expertise level relative to other countries. Making these available is important both to science and policy.

23. The NHM is active in delivering UK commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). NHM is active in undertaking research with funding from the UK Darwin Initiative[13] and has engaged in policy support and taxonomic needs assessments. NHM has led 27 projects since 1993 (more than any other institution), The Darwin Initiative has funded a series of NHM collaborative projects on biodiversity conservation such as on land snail diversity[14] and termites[15] that have involved exploration of endemism and diversity, ecosystem processes, faunal histories, extinction, conservation and invasive species, combined with development of expertise, collections and information.

24. NHM work shows taxonomy in wider contexts; fish diseases and climate change; parasitic diseases such as malaria and schistosomiasis; use of chironomid midges in monitoring climate change; exploring evolution of nanostructures and the potential for industrial application[16].

25. Taxonomy underpins pest control: agricultural, medical and veterinary. BioNET provides numerous cases showing a cost:benefit ratio of 1:50 to 1:700 for taxonomic intervention in pests. NHM examples are control of cassava mealybugs[17] and control of myiasis-causing New World screwworm fly in North Africa[18]. The European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation (EPPO) declared a state of emergency[19] on plant health in 2004, citing the threat of extinction of taxonomy.

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?

26. Stakeholders in taxonomy are diverse and international, ranging from scientists to policy makers, environmental managers, conservation specialists, education, amateur specialists and the public. With research expertise in a growing range of techniques, institutions such as the NHM must continue to be flexible in responding to different needs that will drive the development of taxonomy, with increasing emphasis on developing countries. Institutions must be innovative in engaging stakeholders.

27. NHM sees benefit in international coordination (with the UK playing a part) to deliver virtual research environments and collections that enable increased public use of taxonomy. Access to online taxonomic information will require online diagnostic services using morphological data (automated analyses of images), sequence data (automated assignment of specimens to taxa by sequence) and other modes. Better coordination of all forms of collection—including microbial—and information resources will optimise the infrastructure for taxonomy and science in general.

28. Projects are increasingly undertaken by distributed teams of taxonomists and international institutions are available to play a coordinating role: the UK participates in and benefits from these initiatives. In the UK, the Research Councils have funded e-systematics (such as Creating a Taxonomic e-Science (CATE)[20], which will link into the Encyclopedia of Life (EOL)) on a one-off basis. Sustainability and long-term delivery of research and information relies on participating institutions adopting such approaches as strategic priorities.

29. Funding for taxonomy from different sources in Government and elsewhere is not a disadvantage: it means that taxonomic institutions continually review their potential contributions to policy and to science as a whole. However, some organisations and initiatives assume, in developing strategic plans, that taxonomic research and infrastructure will be available to meet their needs. This assumption may mean that taxonomy is not mentioned—although clearly demanded by the objectives—or, if mentioned, there is no substantive discussion with the institutions providing taxonomic expertise and infrastructure. The previous Inquiry recommended better coordination of taxonomic users, led by government, which would lead to better definition of priorities, gaps and resource needs: this remains to be pursued but could develop a common strategic engagement with taxonomic institutions and infrastructures.

30. There is potential for better integration, rationalisation and optimisation of taxonomic services in the UK—there are small facilities in government departments such as Defra and elsewhere. There should be exploration of the US model of linking specialist staff to major facilities such as the NHM eg US Department of Agriculture (USDA) staff in the Smithsonian Institution.

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?

And

5. How does funding in other countries compare? Could there be more international collaboration? If so, what form should this collaboration take and how might it be achieved?

31. Taxonomic information for the future will arise both from new research initiatives and from development of systems that capture, recombine and integrate available information. There are constraints on delivering integrated information: the roles of lead institutions are expanding but the resource for bridging the gap from innovative research to implementation of information infrastructures is not. There is growing international demand for capacity building, information access, support for local biodiversity conservation and other needs but limited resources to meet it.

32. Targeted intervention for taxonomy in the 1990s from NERC and the Wellcome Trust had impacts that are still seen in a small number of universities. However, this did not lead to a lasting understanding in funding agencies of the importance and benefits of taxonomy and as a consequence funding outside the NHM and the Royal Botanic Gardens in Kew and Edinburgh is fragmentary.

33. The USA National Science Foundation provides additional funding for taxonomy[21] through the Biodiversity Surveys and Inventories program of $6 million per year, with other systematics, phylogeny and taxonomy (including revisionary systematics) funding of $6 million per year[22]. The total NSF budget was $5.9 billion in 2007. The UK science budget in 2007-08 is £2.83 billion (excluding MRC): were the UK to provide the same level of targeted additional funding as the USA, it would allocate £5.76 million. Such a level of funding would develop UK capabilities more widely in the science base but would not fund the expansion of taxonomy in new forms to such as barcoding of life or research on ecosystem services.

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?

34. The impacts of DNA technologies in phylogenetics have been considerable, to the extent that DNA data can be regarded very much as part of the taxonomic mainstream and contributes to a creative set of scientific questions about evolution, origins and diversity. Image capture and analysis has not yet had high impact but automated identification using this technology is developing.

35. The NERC Science Theme Report on Biodiversity[23] says "Systematics and taxonomy are essential underpinning for any work on biodiversity. There are a number of challenges and opportunities for systematic biology including e-science, DNA barcoding, and providing increased human capacity to reverse declining taxonomic expertise."

36. A major development has been the use of short DNA sequences in the form of molecular "barcodes" to transform the identification and even discovery of species. NHM is a founding member of the Consortium for the Barcoding of Life (CBoL)[24], which is "developing DNA barcoding as a global standard for the identification of biological species". NHM hosted the first international scientific conference. These techniques and data will gradually be integrated into taxonomy as a whole. Sequencing capacity is adequate for an expansion of barcoding to a much larger scale but resources for specimen collection and processing are not.

37. The impacts of new technologies in systematic phylogenetics are seen in the literature in abundance: we have seen a transition from sequencing for its own sake to a more creative set of scientific questions about evolution, origins and diversity. Taxonomy and systematics will continue to engage with new opportunities as they emerge, just as in many other areas of science. The discussion in section 1 above refers to the integrated development of taxonomy and systematics that includes both existing applications and new techniques.

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?

38. New technology is leading to improvements in information delivery and analysis. The range of initiatives involving taxonomic data is wide: climate change, invasive species, biodiversity conservation, ecosystem management and biosecurity mean growing interests in global data. NHM is working in partnership to build and operate several international initiatives to meet this need.

39. The following are needed for taxonomic data development:

— Significantly larger biodiversity informatics capability to deal with data from fast DNA sequencing for taxonomy and other activities. Storage capacities will need to expand but costs are likely to fall.

— Information in open access formats. Heritage data transformed into digital form.

— Standard ontologies to ensure consistency in data management and interpretation. A unique identifier system for different data types; different naming systems will coexist.

— Collecting will be essential but may be automated by new technology.

— A common system of geographical data for use with taxonomy.

40. A foundation of databases of names, checked for stability and linked to colloquial names, is required by many users including for both scientific and legal purposes. The NHM has provided the species dictionary for the National Biodiversity Network (NBN)[25] and works on standardisation of terminologies and data standards through the group Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG)[26]. With Species 2000, RBG Kew, RBG Edinburgh, Cardiff University and CABI, NHM is seeking funding to provide a list of names of all known species on earth—the Catalogue of Life.

41. Biodiversity information is made available through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility,[27] and there is future potential in the Encyclopedia of Life, that aims to make all key information about every living species accessible to all[28] through databases and web pages. The NHM is a partner in providing taxonomic information through the Biodiversity Heritage Library[29], which will provide over two million digital volumes to support the work of taxonomists and others.

42. The systems depend on commitment beyond initial funded development; institutions such as the NHM increasingly commit resources to data entry, quality control, IT infrastructures and support and data management. The eventual costs are not always clear because the rapid development of technology can change costs. There is in some cases a commitment to institutional strategic alignment. There is not yet a consensus on how to give appropriate academic credit to research scientists for adding value to data holdings.

43. There is a need for coordination in the UK and more widely for the development of information infrastructures: taxonomy in this sense can be compared to other areas of science such as earth observation or long-term surveys. The population and management of larger scale datasets and strategic integration of these activities is happening, particularly in Europe and between Europe and the USA, but is limited by the resources of the collaborating institutions—if a transformation in the volume and utility of information is to happen, coordination will be of increasing importance.

44. More than 60,000 people are regularly involved in biological recording in the UK, mostly on a volunteer basis, and these efforts have provided over 60 million individual wildlife observations. Many participants are amateurs. The NHM is active in developing its approach to serving amateur interests with its new Darwin Centre and initiatives such as the OPAL project.

8. What is the role of the major regional museums and collections? How are taxonomic collections curated and funded?

45. Many areas of science depend on infrastructure. Taxonomy's infrastructure is a sophisticated organisation of collections, libraries and data which are often provided by museums. There is a need in the UK to define important collections for taxonomy, whether in national museums, regional museums, university departments or smaller collections: all of these should be drawn into a common system of access for research and harmonised information provision, which requires resources.

46. Being a museum gives the NHM opportunities to engage amateur experts and wider audiences with collections and expertise; the aim is to develop understanding and involvement in the natural world and in science. The combination of active research, well-curated collections, libraries and analytical facilities means that the NHM is attractive for international research visitors—more than 8,000 each year. The EU-funded SYNTHESYS[30] gives access for scientists to European collections and enables common standards to be developed: The UK partners (NHM, RBG Kew and RBG Edinburgh) received more than twice the number of applications for access than any of the other ten countries involved.

47. Museums need to be a focus for collecting in the future. There is potential for collaboration on coordinated approaches and common facilities—for example in forming consortia for new storage facilities for tissues and microbial diversity with universities and others. The strength of museums as foci for public engagement will mean that they can play an important role in receipt and longer-term use of collections from ecological surveys and observation, but resources will be an issue for all. The scientific value provided by the NHM arises from both research and curation staff: they have essential contributions to make to taxonomy and information needed by stakeholders.

48. Museums have an additional value in being integrated with the cultural sector, which gives opportunities for engagement with other academic areas and to generate public interest in science and the natural world. AHRC is funding collaboration between NHM and Kingston University, scoping the use of taxonomic collections for research in history, art and social sciences.

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?

And

10. What needs to be done to ensure that web-based taxonomy information is of high quality, reliable and user-friendly?

49. Taxonomy as an information science is expanding, with web innovation at the core. The web allows huge amounts of diffuse information to be organised and used in new ways, creating links and allowing new datasets to be assembled from taxonomic data of known quality and provenance. It will be important in particular to combine existing information with the anticipated large numbers of molecular data to enable new scientific research.

50. The NERC-funded Creating a Taxonomic e-Science[31] (CATE) project is to producing a computer application to build demonstrator web-based taxonomies for two conspicuous groups of organisms: Hawkmoths (Sphingidae) and Aroids (Araceae). CATE is a collaborative project between NHM (lead institute), RBG Kew, and Oxford University. EDIT[32] is providing an environment for integrated European web-taxonomy, with the systems for revisionary taxonomy NHM-led. A particular innovation is the development of scratchpads which create flexible spaces for taxonomists to collaborate[33]

51. Resource availability in Europe and the US tend to mean that international initiatives are generally larger and more diverse than those in the UK. Although UK institutions are active and influential in Europe and beyond, resources for collaboration in the UK are limited and the scope for engagement within the UK science base and with smaller collections institutions is correspondingly smaller.

52. The Web is leading to a transformation in the publication of taxonomy—Zootaxa is a good example of a rapidly growing e-journal[34] with growing impact and international involvement.

53. Quality, reliability and user needs are central to the initiatives mentioned. A major risk to web-based taxonomy is that inaccurate information can be disseminated if control systems and expert taxonomists are not fully involved. Peer review, institutional and funder responsibility, engagement and ongoing development with users are all necessary. Business models are developed to ensure sustainability: ultimately the commitment of participating institutions is essential.

11. How does the taxonomic community engage with the non-taxonomic community? What role do field studies play?

54. Natural history museums have lengthy histories of providing active involvement for the public and specialists and professionals in other fields with taxonomists. Galleries, publications, events, outreach, education, websites, professional training, consultancy and many other examples are available.

55. NHM collaborated with Lancaster University[35] with ESRC funding on the development of strategies for engaging amateurs as experts in natural history. This experience has been built into the UK Lottery-funded Open Air Laboratories (OPAL), which will support, build capacity and enhance the profile of amateur naturalists and voluntary groups.

56. NHM has worked as part of the Riverfly Partnership[36] to train over 500 anglers in identification skills that have enabled them to monitor and address declines in riverfly populations, including declines in overall abundance and threats to individual species. This has been achieved by bringing together a small number of taxonomists with the anglers, conservationists, watercourse managers to increased knowledge of riverfly populations.

Skills base

12. What are the numbers and ages of trained taxonomists working in UK universities and other organisations?

And

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?

57. Data on UK taxonomists are given under question 1. The cohort of systematists approaching retirement includes many taxon specialists: younger systematists tend to have been trained in a more hypothesis-driven environment, sometimes with a molecular perspective. Although taxonomy is changing there will continue to be a need for morphological skills. Moving taxonomy to the internet will help keep a virtual knowledge base alive but the apparent decline of taxon specialists is a concern.

58. NHM does not have difficulty in recruiting taxonomists: a majority of applicants for new posts are based overseas. Considerations in making appointments include the potential for producing research outputs of high quality, securing competitive grants, deriving value from working with collections and other considerations: descriptive taxonomy will generally be only one among several factors considered.

59. In the USA the NSF PEET[37] programme supports research on the taxonomy of poorly known groups of organisms, trains new taxonomic experts, and encourages development and use of web-accessible taxonomic resources and products: this is in addition to museum funding. PEET is explicitly in response to "retirement of taxonomic specialists, shifts in academic recruitment and staffing, and reductions in graduate training" that "impede biodiversity research and conservation".

60. The NHM offers student training in taxonomy through the MSc[38] on Advanced Methods in Taxonomy and Systematics run with Imperial College. It is also involved in supervision of 150 PhD students at any one time, providing more than £100,000 each year for CASE studentships and a number of fully-funded students. Taxonomy for undergraduates could be achieved through summer schools, given the reduction in university capacity in recent years.

4 February 2008