We need monographs, and revisions

Abstract

The production of monographs has kept zoologists busy for a very long time. Monographs often cover the material collected during expeditions and are mostly produced as books. Journals have not much to do with monographs, but they often contribute to the publication of the intermediate work that is conducive to their production. Revisions of higher taxa, often containing the description of new species, are the main type of contribution leading to a monograph. Monographs must cover a well-settled knowledge, even though it is inevitable that they are rapidly destined to become obsolete for several reasons. The exploration of biodiversity is not finished yet, and there are more species to be discovered than those that have already received a name. The disentangling of phylogenies often leads to merging taxa, or to splitting them, with inevitable changes in nomenclature. Furthermore, species move. If a monograph covers a given region, it is often the case that, in the course of decades, new species arrive from elsewhere, and well-known species become rare or even locally extinct. Like all things in biology, faunas are dynamic. The preparation of a monograph is the product of decades of work. Electronic publication is a perfect tool for monographs, since it allows for updates and corrections as soon as new knowledge becomes available. The Fauna of Italy, so far, is covered by 44 monographs that started to be produced in the 1950s. They treat a small part of the fauna and, obviously, the old ones need to be thoroughly revised. Several monographs are waiting to be published, but it is increasingly rare to find authors with sufficient expertise to produce such pieces of work. Due to the current evaluation measures of scientific production, monographs receive limited reward: they are just one title in own publication score, and the lack of impact factor is considered as an index of low quality. It does not matter if the number of pages is in the hundreds and citations are made for a very long time, with an almost infinite shelf life for these products. This kind of science is in a paradoxical situation. The importance of biodiversity is universally acknowledged, and monographs are just the catalogue of the natural capital that sustains us, allowing for the functioning of ecosystems. With these premises, it should be obvious that the exploration of biodiversity and its inventorying is the most urgent priority for mankind. Our impact on biodiversity is affecting the goods and services that benefit us and that are vital for our well being. The knowledge of the natural capital is urgent because we are eroding it now, and the effects of this erosion are overwhelmingly evident. This should lead to huge investments in the production of monographs and to give a high value to the expertise leading to their production. Instead, the expertise is vanishing, and there is no money for this kind of research. The series of monographs covering the Fauna of Italy, due to these circumstances, is going through severe difficulties in continuing the production of new work. The expertise is scant, and the funds are severely limited. There is a crisis and we must spare money, true! But the investments to study other components of nature are in the hundreds of billions. These are the orders of magnitude of funds dedicated to discover the intimate structure of matter (particle physics) or the structure of the universe (astrophysics). Particles and galaxies are at the dimensional extremes of the organization of matter. They are either too small or too large to be affected by our action or to affect our well being. Understanding the elementary structure of matter, and the origins and structure of the universe, are crucial enterprises that, of course, deserve the greatest attention. But one might ask: are they so urgent? Is it wise to invest huge amounts of money on the progress of this kind of knowledge and to leave in almost complete poverty the branch of science that covers biodiversity? Knowing about the existence of still unknown particles or galaxies or black holes is exciting, but it will not affect our survival, and we cannot affect particles and galaxies with our existence. Instead, biodiversity is being affected right now. But there is no money to take inventory of the natural capital, let alone manage and protect it. These decisions Italian Journal of Zoology, 2015, 149–150 Vol. 82, No. 2, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/11250003.2015.1041718