Cited by 955Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife EducationEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesAnimal and Plant Science Education

The role of taxonomy in species conservation

Open access
Mace, Georgina M.·2004·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Taxonomy and species conservation are often assumed to be completely interdependent activities. However, a shortage of taxonomic information and skills, and confusion over where the limits to ‘species’ should be set, both cause problems for conservationists. There is no simple solution because species lists used for conservation planning (e.g. threatened species, species richness estimates, species covered by legislation) are often also used to determine which units should be the focus of conservation actions; this despite the fact that the two processes have such different goals and information needs. Species conservation needs two kinds of taxonomic solution: (i) a set of practical rules to standardize the species units included on lists; and (ii) an approach to the units chosen for conservation recovery planning which recognizes the dynamic nature of natural systems and the differences from the units in listing processes that result. These solutions are well within our grasp but require a new kind of collaboration among conservation biologists, taxonomists and legislators, as well as an increased resource of taxonomists with relevant and high–quality skills.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2003.1454

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Identifying which species are recognized and how they are defined affects inferred biodiversity patterns at local, regional, and global scales, including assessments of conservation priorities and threats.

    “Progress in this arena is critical because identifying which species are recognized and how they are defined affects inferred biodiversity patterns at local, regional, and global scales, including assessments of conservation priorities and threats (Mace 2004; Thomson et al. 2018).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mace, G. M.
Affiliations
Zoological Society of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Mace, Georgina M.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2004-04-29
Volume
359
Issue
1444
Pages
711-719
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2003220902
Cited by
955
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 73 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 97 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 57 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 25
FWCI
5.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Animal and Plant Science Education
Keywords
taxonomy, species conservation, species delimitation, conservation planning, species checklist, threatened species, species richness estimation, conservation legislation
MeSH terms
Classification, Conservation of Natural Resources, Phylogeny, Species Specificity, Biodiversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review