Are There Really Twice as Many Bovid Species as We Thought?

Heller, R.; Frandsen, P.; Lorenzen, E. D.; Siegismund, H. R.

http://hdl.handle.net/10400.7/566

Use this identifier to reference this record.

Name:	Description:	Size:	Format:
Helleretal_Are there really twice as many bovids as we thought_2013.pdf	artigo principal	79.19 KB	Adobe PDF	Download

Send Feedback

Authors

Abstract(s)

A major reappraisal of the taxonomy of ungulates (hoofed mammals) was presented in 2011 (Groves and Grubb 2011; G&G henceforth). The reappraisal presents a drastic revision of the taxonomic diversity of the group. It nearly doubles the number of bovid species—a group comprising cattle, bison, buffalo, goats, sheep, and antelopes—currently recognized (IUCN 2012), raising the number of species from 143 to 279. In our opinion, this represents taxonomic inflation; ecotypes or subspecies have been raised to the level of full species based not on new data, but solely on a change in the species concept used (Isaac et al. 2004). As we argue below, the excessive splitting of species is unconvincing in many cases. Furthermore, we warn that such taxonomic inflation in the bovids may impede management and conservation efforts (Isaac et al. 2004; Mace 2004; Frankham et al. 2012). The revised bovid species list of G&G was incorporated into the recently published “Handbook of the Mammals of the World—Volume 2” (Wilson and Mittermeier 2011; HMW henceforth) published in collaboration with the IUCN and Conservation International, 2 of the leading international authorities involved in the conservation of global biodiversity. Whereas G&G is a scientific revision intended for experts in the field, HMW is a multiauthored book series presenting the most up-to-date taxonomy of mammals for a broader readership. Collectively, these two volumes are likely to be highly influential and serve as a guideline for a wide-ranging audience including taxonomists, conservationists, ecologists, biodiversity managers, and policy makers. Any taxonomic revision that doubles the number of species within a family must anticipate critical evaluation, not least when it occurs in a prominent group such as the bovids. Here, we discuss the revision and its potential consequences, which we believe may be detrimental in many respects. The critiques we are raising are two-fold. First, we call into question the scientific grounds for the species splitting in G&G. Second, we criticize HMW for singularly adopting the bovid species list of G&G without subjecting it to critical evaluation. We discuss some of the practical downstream consequences of these actions.

Keywords

Animals Biological Evolution Phylogeny Ruminants Genetic Speciation

URI

http://hdl.handle.net/10400.7/566

Citation

Rasmus Heller, Peter Frandsen, Eline D. Lorenzen, and Hans R. Siegismund Are There Really Twice as Many Bovid Species as We Thought? Syst Biol (2013) 62 (3): 490-493 first published online January 29, 2013 doi:10.1093/sysbio/syt004