{"title":"欺骗昆虫,欺骗分类学家?欧洲兰属植物分类歧异的理论意义","authors":"Vincent Cuypers , Thomas A.C. Reydon , Tom Artois","doi":"10.1016/j.ppees.2022.125686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>The orchid genus </span><span><em>Ophrys</em></span> is a textbook example of a taxonomic controversy, with the number of species recognised in different classifications varying from around 10 to over 350, causing confusion among researchers and enthusiasts. Here, we illustrate that there are multiple drivers behind that disagreement, representing debates and discussions of various nature, and then reflect on strategies to mitigate confusion among the users of <em>Ophrys</em> taxonomies, reconciling legitimate taxonomic debates with demands for clarity among the broader biological community. First, we distil six possible factors explaining taxonomic disagreement from general literature on taxonomic difficulties, and assess the importance of each of them for the <em>Ophrys</em> controversy. We then explore two strategies to reduce confusion among the users of the taxonomies in question. On the one hand, we illustrate the possibility of constructing a consensus-based reference taxonomy for external users, despite the ongoing taxonomic disagreement, and on the other hand we explore a ‘pluralist’ alternative, in which different classifications are allowed to coexist, but in an orderly manner. Doing so, we build a case for the <em>Ophrys</em> systematics community to reflect collectively on which strategy to adopt.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deceiving insects, deceiving taxonomists? Making theoretical sense of taxonomic disagreement in the European orchid genus Ophrys\",\"authors\":\"Vincent Cuypers , Thomas A.C. Reydon , Tom Artois\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ppees.2022.125686\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>The orchid genus </span><span><em>Ophrys</em></span> is a textbook example of a taxonomic controversy, with the number of species recognised in different classifications varying from around 10 to over 350, causing confusion among researchers and enthusiasts. Here, we illustrate that there are multiple drivers behind that disagreement, representing debates and discussions of various nature, and then reflect on strategies to mitigate confusion among the users of <em>Ophrys</em> taxonomies, reconciling legitimate taxonomic debates with demands for clarity among the broader biological community. First, we distil six possible factors explaining taxonomic disagreement from general literature on taxonomic difficulties, and assess the importance of each of them for the <em>Ophrys</em> controversy. We then explore two strategies to reduce confusion among the users of the taxonomies in question. On the one hand, we illustrate the possibility of constructing a consensus-based reference taxonomy for external users, despite the ongoing taxonomic disagreement, and on the other hand we explore a ‘pluralist’ alternative, in which different classifications are allowed to coexist, but in an orderly manner. Doing so, we build a case for the <em>Ophrys</em> systematics community to reflect collectively on which strategy to adopt.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1433831922000282\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1433831922000282","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deceiving insects, deceiving taxonomists? Making theoretical sense of taxonomic disagreement in the European orchid genus Ophrys
The orchid genus Ophrys is a textbook example of a taxonomic controversy, with the number of species recognised in different classifications varying from around 10 to over 350, causing confusion among researchers and enthusiasts. Here, we illustrate that there are multiple drivers behind that disagreement, representing debates and discussions of various nature, and then reflect on strategies to mitigate confusion among the users of Ophrys taxonomies, reconciling legitimate taxonomic debates with demands for clarity among the broader biological community. First, we distil six possible factors explaining taxonomic disagreement from general literature on taxonomic difficulties, and assess the importance of each of them for the Ophrys controversy. We then explore two strategies to reduce confusion among the users of the taxonomies in question. On the one hand, we illustrate the possibility of constructing a consensus-based reference taxonomy for external users, despite the ongoing taxonomic disagreement, and on the other hand we explore a ‘pluralist’ alternative, in which different classifications are allowed to coexist, but in an orderly manner. Doing so, we build a case for the Ophrys systematics community to reflect collectively on which strategy to adopt.