Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 177

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Impediments to taxonomy and users of taxonomy: accessibility and impact evaluation

Open access
Ebach, Malte C., Valdecasas, Antonio G., Wheeler, Quentin D.·2011·Cladistics

Abstract

There has been much discussion of the "taxonomic impediment". This phrase confuses two kinds of impediment: an impediment to end users imposed by lack of reliable information; and impediments to taxonomy itself, which vary from insufficient funding to low citation rates of taxonomic monographs. In order to resolve both these types of impediment, taxonomy needs to be revitalized through funding and training taxonomists, as well as investing in taxonomic revisions and monographs rather than technological surrogates such as DNA barcoding. © The Willi Hennig Society 2011.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00348.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 177

Metadata

Authors
Ebach, M. C., Valdecasas, A. G., & Wheeler, Q. D.
Venue
Cladistics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-02-17
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
550-557
ISSN
0748-3007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2111618244
Cited by
177
References
0
FWCI
7.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impediments to taxonomy and users of taxonomy: accessibility and impact evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00348.x
The paper
Ebach, M. C., Valdecasas, A. G., & Wheeler, Q. D. (2011). Impediments to taxonomy and users of taxonomy: accessibility and impact evaluation. Cladistics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00348.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.