分类学家在蠕虫物种歧视决策中的变异性:噪声审计。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PARASITOLOGY
Robert Poulin, Jerusha Bennett, Bronwen Presswell
{"title":"分类学家在蠕虫物种歧视决策中的变异性:噪声审计。","authors":"Robert Poulin, Jerusha Bennett, Bronwen Presswell","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpara.2025.06.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Determining whether or not superficially similar helminth specimens belong to the same species can be challenging, even for expert taxonomists. The possibility of cryptic species and host-induced morphological variation, combined with the lack of universally accepted thresholds for what can be considered intraspecific genetic variation, are largely to blame. In the end, decisions come down to the judgment of taxonomists. As with other domains of human judgment, however, taxonomic decisions are subject to noise, i.e., differences of opinions among taxonomists when presented with the same evidence. Here, we quantify this noise and test the role of past experience in taxonomic decision-making. We presented morphological, genetic and host data on 15 sets of hypothetical but realistic trematode specimens, each split into two groups, and asked many of the world's top trematode taxonomists to decide whether the two groups belonged to the same species, to different species, or they were not sure. Working independently on the exact same information, the taxonomists rendered species delimitation decisions that were largely inconsistent with each other, and unrelated to their past experience (measured as years of experience or numbers of published species descriptions). The inevitable conclusion is that whether two sets of trematode specimens are considered to represent the same species or two different species depends entirely on the particular taxonomist who examines them. We propose three strategies to reduce noise and achieve greater consistency and repeatability in species delimitation among different taxonomists: establishment of clear species discrimination guidelines, decomposition of the evidence into its separate components prior to a final decision, and aggregation of independent judgements from two or more experienced taxonomists. Limiting subjectivity in species delimitation decisions is essential if taxonomy is to continue underpinning other disciplines, from biodiversity and ecological research to conservation biology and wildlife management.</p>","PeriodicalId":13725,"journal":{"name":"International journal for parasitology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variability among taxonomists in helminth species discrimination decisions: a noise audit.\",\"authors\":\"Robert Poulin, Jerusha Bennett, Bronwen Presswell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijpara.2025.06.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Determining whether or not superficially similar helminth specimens belong to the same species can be challenging, even for expert taxonomists. The possibility of cryptic species and host-induced morphological variation, combined with the lack of universally accepted thresholds for what can be considered intraspecific genetic variation, are largely to blame. In the end, decisions come down to the judgment of taxonomists. As with other domains of human judgment, however, taxonomic decisions are subject to noise, i.e., differences of opinions among taxonomists when presented with the same evidence. Here, we quantify this noise and test the role of past experience in taxonomic decision-making. We presented morphological, genetic and host data on 15 sets of hypothetical but realistic trematode specimens, each split into two groups, and asked many of the world's top trematode taxonomists to decide whether the two groups belonged to the same species, to different species, or they were not sure. Working independently on the exact same information, the taxonomists rendered species delimitation decisions that were largely inconsistent with each other, and unrelated to their past experience (measured as years of experience or numbers of published species descriptions). The inevitable conclusion is that whether two sets of trematode specimens are considered to represent the same species or two different species depends entirely on the particular taxonomist who examines them. We propose three strategies to reduce noise and achieve greater consistency and repeatability in species delimitation among different taxonomists: establishment of clear species discrimination guidelines, decomposition of the evidence into its separate components prior to a final decision, and aggregation of independent judgements from two or more experienced taxonomists. Limiting subjectivity in species delimitation decisions is essential if taxonomy is to continue underpinning other disciplines, from biodiversity and ecological research to conservation biology and wildlife management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal for parasitology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal for parasitology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpara.2025.06.003\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PARASITOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal for parasitology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpara.2025.06.003","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PARASITOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

确定表面相似的蠕虫标本是否属于同一物种可能是一项挑战,即使对专家分类学家来说也是如此。隐藏物种和宿主诱导的形态变异的可能性,加上缺乏普遍接受的种内遗传变异的阈值,在很大程度上是罪魁祸首。最终,决定取决于分类学家的判断。然而,与人类判断的其他领域一样,分类学的决定也会受到噪音的影响,即,当提出相同的证据时,分类学家之间的意见分歧。在这里,我们量化了这种噪音,并测试了过去的经验在分类决策中的作用。我们提供了15组假设但真实的吸虫标本的形态、遗传和宿主数据,每组被分成两组,并要求许多世界顶级吸虫分类学家判断这两组是属于同一物种,不同物种,还是他们不确定。在完全相同的信息上独立工作,分类学家们做出的物种划分决定在很大程度上彼此不一致,而且与他们过去的经验(以多年的经验或发表的物种描述的数量来衡量)无关。不可避免的结论是,两组吸虫标本是否被认为代表同一物种或两个不同的物种完全取决于检查它们的特定分类学家。我们提出了三种策略,以减少不同分类学家之间的物种划分噪音,并提高一致性和可重复性:建立明确的物种区分准则,在最终决定之前将证据分解为单独的组成部分,以及汇总两个或更多有经验的分类学家的独立判断。如果分类学要继续支撑其他学科,从生物多样性和生态研究到保护生物学和野生动物管理,那么限制物种划界决策中的主观性是必不可少的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Variability among taxonomists in helminth species discrimination decisions: a noise audit.

Determining whether or not superficially similar helminth specimens belong to the same species can be challenging, even for expert taxonomists. The possibility of cryptic species and host-induced morphological variation, combined with the lack of universally accepted thresholds for what can be considered intraspecific genetic variation, are largely to blame. In the end, decisions come down to the judgment of taxonomists. As with other domains of human judgment, however, taxonomic decisions are subject to noise, i.e., differences of opinions among taxonomists when presented with the same evidence. Here, we quantify this noise and test the role of past experience in taxonomic decision-making. We presented morphological, genetic and host data on 15 sets of hypothetical but realistic trematode specimens, each split into two groups, and asked many of the world's top trematode taxonomists to decide whether the two groups belonged to the same species, to different species, or they were not sure. Working independently on the exact same information, the taxonomists rendered species delimitation decisions that were largely inconsistent with each other, and unrelated to their past experience (measured as years of experience or numbers of published species descriptions). The inevitable conclusion is that whether two sets of trematode specimens are considered to represent the same species or two different species depends entirely on the particular taxonomist who examines them. We propose three strategies to reduce noise and achieve greater consistency and repeatability in species delimitation among different taxonomists: establishment of clear species discrimination guidelines, decomposition of the evidence into its separate components prior to a final decision, and aggregation of independent judgements from two or more experienced taxonomists. Limiting subjectivity in species delimitation decisions is essential if taxonomy is to continue underpinning other disciplines, from biodiversity and ecological research to conservation biology and wildlife management.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
2.50%
发文量
76
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: International Journal for Parasitology offers authors the option to sponsor nonsubscriber access to their articles on Elsevier electronic publishing platforms. For more information please view our Sponsored Articles page. The International Journal for Parasitology publishes the results of original research in all aspects of basic and applied parasitology, including all the fields covered by its Specialist Editors, and ranging from parasites and host-parasite relationships of intrinsic biological interest to those of social and economic importance in human and veterinary medicine and agriculture.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信