Log in

Biodiversity loss and the taxonomic bottleneck: emerging biodiversity science

  • Special Issue
  • Global changes in terrestrial ecosystems
  • Published:
Ecological Research

Abstract

Human domination of the Earth has resulted in dramatic changes to global and local patterns of biodiversity. Biodiversity is critical to human sustainability because it drives the ecosystem services that provide the core of our life-support system. As we, the human species, are the primary factor leading to the decline in biodiversity, we need detailed information about the biodiversity and species composition of specific locations in order to understand how different species contribute to ecosystem services and how humans can sustainably conserve and manage biodiversity. Taxonomy and ecology, two fundamental sciences that generate the knowledge about biodiversity, are associated with a number of limitations that prevent them from providing the information needed to fully understand the relevance of biodiversity in its entirety for human sustainability: (1) biodiversity conservation strategies that tend to be overly focused on research and policy on a global scale with little impact on local biodiversity; (2) the small knowledge base of extant global biodiversity; (3) a lack of much-needed site-specific data on the species composition of communities in human-dominated landscapes, which hinders ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation; (4) biodiversity studies with a lack of taxonomic precision; (5) a lack of taxonomic expertise and trained taxonomists; (6) a taxonomic bottleneck in biodiversity inventory and assessment; and (7) neglect of taxonomic resources and a lack of taxonomic service infrastructure for biodiversity science. These limitations are directly related to contemporary trends in research, conservation strategies, environmental stewardship, environmental education, sustainable development, and local site-specific conservation. Today’s biological knowledge is built on the known global biodiversity, which represents barely 20% of what is currently extant (commonly accepted estimate of 10 million species) on planet Earth. Much remains unexplored and unknown, particularly in hotspots regions of Africa, South Eastern Asia, and South and Central America, including many develo** or underdeveloped countries, where localized biodiversity is scarcely studied or described. "Backyard biodiversity", defined as local biodiversity near human habitation, refers to the natural resources and capital for ecosystem services at the grassroots level, which urgently needs to be explored, documented, and conserved as it is the backbone of sustainable economic development in these countries. Beginning with early identification and documentation of local flora and fauna, taxonomy has documented global biodiversity and natural history based on the collection of "backyard biodiversity" specimens worldwide. However, this branch of science suffered a continuous decline in the latter half of the twentieth century, and has now reached a point of potential demise. At present there are very few professional taxonomists and trained local parataxonomists worldwide, while the need for, and demands on, taxonomic services by conservation and resource management communities are rapidly increasing. Systematic collections, the material basis of biodiversity information, have been neglected and abandoned, particularly at institutions of higher learning. Considering the rapid increase in the human population and urbanization, human sustainability requires new conceptual and practical approaches to refocusing and energizing the study of the biodiversity that is the core of natural resources for sustainable development and biotic capital for sustaining our life-support system. In this paper we aim to document and extrapolate the essence of biodiversity, discuss the state and nature of taxonomic demise, the trends of recent biodiversity studies, and suggest reasonable approaches to a biodiversity science to facilitate the expansion of global biodiversity knowledge and to create useful data on backyard biodiversity worldwide towards human sustainability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alcorn JB (1993) Indigenous peoples and conservation. Conserv Biol 7:424–426

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldi A (1999) Biodiversity in Hungary: advantages and limitations of taxonomically complete faunal inventories. Nat Areas J 19:73–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmford A, Lyon AJE, Lang RM (2000) Testing the higher taxon approach to conservation planning in a megadiverse group: the macrofungi. Biol Conserv 93:209–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmford A, Bruner A, Cooper P, Costanza R, Farber S, Green RE, Jenkins M, Jefferies P, Jessamy V, Madden J, Munro K, Myers N, Naeem S, Paavola J, Rayment M, Rosendo S, Roughgarden J, Trumper K, Turner RK (2002) Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297:950–953

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bauhin C (1623) Pinax theatri botanici. Basel

  • Beattie AJ, Major JD, Oliver I (1993) Rapid biodiversity assessment: a review. In: Rapid biodiversity assessment: proceedings of the biodiversity assessment workshop 1993. Research Unit for Biodiversity and Bioresources, Macquuarie University, Sydney, pp 4–14

  • Benbrooks C, Gross ME III, Holloran JM, Hansen MK, Maquardt S (1996) Pest management at the crossroads. Consumers Union, Yonkers

  • Berkes F (2004) Rethinking community-based conservation. Conserv Biol 18:621–630

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertrand Y, Pleijel F, Rouse GW (2006) Taxonomic surrogacy in biodiversity assessments, and the meaning of Linnean ranks. System Biodivers 4:149–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesmeijer JC, Roberts SPM, Reemer M, Ohlemiller R, Edwards M, Peeters T, Schaffer AD, Potts SG, Keenkers R, Thomas CD, Settele J, Kumin WE (2006) Parallel declines in pollinators and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and the Netherlands. Science 313:351–354

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boone JH, Mahan CG, Kim KC (2005) Biodiversity inventory: approaches, analysis, and synthesis. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR-2005/015. US Department Interior, National Park Service, Northeast Region, Philadelphia

  • Botkin DB, Megonigal P, Sampson N (1997) Consideration of the state of ecosystem science and the art of ecosystem management: discussion paper. The Center for the Study of the Environment, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP)

  • Broberg L (2003) Conserving ecosystems locally: a role for ecologists in land-use planning. Bioscience 53:670–673

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown LR (2006) Plan B 2.0: rescuing a planet under stress and a civilization in trouble. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunfels O (1530) Herbarium vivae eicones, vol 1. Argent

  • Büchs W (ed) (2003) Biotic indicators for biodiversity and sustainable agriculture. Elsevier, Amsterdam

  • Cavigelli MA, Robertson GP (2000) The functional significance of denitrifier community composition in a terrestrial ecosystem. Ecology 81:1402–1414

    Google Scholar 

  • CBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity) (2006a) Sustaining life on earth: how the convention on biological diversity promotes nature and human well-being. CBD, Montreal

  • CBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity) (2006b) Global biodiversity outlook 2. CBD, Montreal

  • Center for Wildlife Law (1996) Saving biodiversity: a status report on state laws, policies and programs. Defenders of Wildlife, Washington DC

  • Christensen NL, Bartuska AM, Brown JH, Carpenter S, D-Antonio C, Francis R, Franklin JF, MacMahon JA, Noss RF, Parsons DJ, Peterson CH, Turner MG, Woodmansee RG (1996) The report of the ecological society of America Committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecol Appl 6:665–691

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen JE (1995) How many people can the earth support? Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (2005) Human population grows up. Sci Am 48–55

  • Coleman DC, Hendrix PF (2001) Invertebrates as webmasters in ecosystems. CAB International, Wallingford

    Google Scholar 

  • Constanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naheem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Czuzdi C, Szlavecz K (2002) Diplocardia patuxentis, a new earthworm species from Maryland, North America (Oligochaeta: Acanthodrilidae). Ann Zool Nat Hist Mus Hung 94:193–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC (ed) (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island, Washington

  • Daily GC, Ehrlich PR (1995) Population extinction and the biodiversity crisis. In: Perrings CA et al (eds) Biodiversity conservation. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 45–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Danks HV (1996) How to assess insect biodiversity without wasting your time. Document Series No. 5, Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods), Ottawa, Canada

  • Debinski DM, Humphrey PS (1997) An integrated approach to biological diversity assessment. Nat Areas J 17:355–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirzo R, Loraeu M (2005) Biodiversity science evolves. Science 310:943

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirzo R, Raven PH (2003) Global state of biodiversity and loss. Annu Rev Environ Resour 28:137–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson A (2005) Monitoring global rates of biodiversity change: challenges that arise in meeting the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 goals. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 360:229–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Dower R, Ditz D, Faeth P, Johnson N, Kozlof K (1997) Frontiers of sustainability: environmentally sound agriculture, forestry, transportation, and power production. Island, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich PR (2004) Global changes and its influence on biodiversity. In: Casagrandi R, Melia P (eds) Ecologia. Atti del **ii Congresso Nazionale della Societa Italiana di Ecolo (Como, 8–10 September 2003). Aracne, Rome, pp 35–45

  • Ehrlich PR (2005) Twenty-first century systematics and the human predicament. Proc Calif Acad Sci 56(Suppl I):120–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich PR, Ehrlicuh AH (2004) Collision course: population, profligacy, power and the struggle for sustainability. Island, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich PR, Wilson EO (1991) Biodiversity studies: science and policy. Science 253:758–762

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eldredge N (ed) (1992) Systematics, ecology and the biodiversity crisis. Columbia University Press, New York

  • Farber S, Costanza R, Childers DL, Erickson J, Gross K, Grove M, Hopkinson CS, Kahn J, Pincetl JS, Troy A, Warren P, Wilson M (2006) Linking ecology and economics for ecosystem management. Bioscience 56:121–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Field CB (2001) Sharing the garden. Science 294:2490–2491

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Manning AD (2006) Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Front Ecol Environ 4:80–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Foddai D, Bonato L, Pereira LA, Minelli A (2003) Phylogeny and systematics of the Arrupinae (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Mecistocephalidae) with the description of a new dwarfed species. J Nat Hist 37:1247–1267

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, May RM (1992) Taxonomy of taxonomists. Nature 356:281–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Spicer JI (2004) Biodiversity: an introduction. Backwell, Malden

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfray HCJ (2002) Challenges for taxonomy. Nature 417:17–19

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ (2004) A taxonomic wish list for community ecology. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 359:585–597

    Google Scholar 

  • Giampetro M (2004) Multi-scale integrated analysis of agroecosystems. CRC, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grifo F, Rosenthal J (ed) (1997) Biodiversity and human health. Island, Washington

  • Groombridge BE (ed) (1992) Global biodiversity, status of the Earth’s living resources. Chapman and Hall, London

  • Grove SJ (2003) Maintaining data integrity in insect biodiversity assessment projects. J Insect Conserv 7:33–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Grumbine RE (1994) What is ecosystem management? Conserv Biol 8:27–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Grumbine RE (1997) Reflection on “what is ecosystem management?”. Conserv Biol 11:41–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas F, Häuser CL (2006) How many taxonomists are there? www.gti-kontakstelle.de/taxnonomy_E.html. 17 March 2006

  • Hammond PM (1995) The current magnitude of biodiversity. In: Hawkworth DL, Kalin-Arroyo MT, Heywood VH (eds) Global biodiversity assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 113–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Heemsbergen DA, Berg MP, Loreau M, van Hal JR, Faber JH, Verhoef HA (2004) Biodiversity effects on soil processes explained by interspecific functional dissimilarity. Science 306:1019–1020

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heinz Center (H John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment) (2002) The status of the nation’s ecosystems: measuring the lands, waters, and living resources of the United States. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Heywood VH (ed) (1995) Global biodiversity assessment. United Nations Environment Programme. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

  • Holt RD (2006) Ecology: asymmetry and stability. Nature 442:252–253

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper DU, Chapin FS III, Ewel JJ, Hector P, Inchausti AP, Lavorel S, Lawton JH, Lodge DM, Loreau M, Naeem S, Schmid B, Setala H, Symstad AJ, Vandermeer J, Wardle DA (2005) Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol Monogr 75:3–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins GW, Frekleton RP (2002) Declines in the number of amateur and professional taxonomists: implications for conservation. Anim Conserv 5:245–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphries CJ, Williams PH, Vane-Wright RI (1995) Measuring biodiversity value for conservation. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 26:93–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter ML (2005) A mesofilter conservation strategy to complement fine and coarse filters. Conserv Biol 19:1025–1029

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley JS et al (1940) The new systematics. Clarendon, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Imhoff ML, Bounoua L, Ricketts T, Loucks C, Harris R, Lawrence WT (2004) Global patterns in human consumption of net primary production. Nature 429:870–873

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jeroen C, van den Bergh JM, Verbruggen H (1999) Spatial suitability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the “Ecological footprint.” Ecol Econ 29:61–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellert SR (1993) Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conserv Biol 7:845–855

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellert SR, Wilson EO (eds) (1993) The biophilia hypothesis. Island Press, Washington

  • Kim KC (1993) Biodiversity, conservation, and inventory: why insects matter. Biodivers Conserv 2:191–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim KC (1994) Entomology in the changing world: biodiversity and sustainable agriculture. Korean J Entomol 24:145–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim KC (1998) Biodiversity and environmental changes: a great challenge to humanity. In: Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on the geoenvironmental changes and biodiversity in the Northeast Asia, Seoul, 16–19 November 1998, pp 369–375

  • Kim KC (2001) Biodiversity, our living world: your life depends on it. College of Agricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension and Center for Biodiversity Research, Environmental Resources Research Institute, Penn State University, University Park

  • Kim KC (2005a) Biodiversity Inventory and Assessment of the National Guard Training Center at Fort Indiantown Gap (FIG-NGTC), Pennsylvania: Project 1 Invertebrate Biodiversity Inventory and Assessment (2002–2004): Final Report. To Fort Indiantown Gap National Training Center, PA Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Environmental Division, Annville, Pennsylvania

  • Kim KC (2005b) Plenary lecture: biodiversity, humanity, and sustainability: a case for Korea’s DMZ ecosystems. The 5th Asia-Pacific Congress of Entomology, Jeju Island, South Korea, 18–21 October 2005

  • Kim KC (2006a) Integrated biodiversity assessment center (IBAC): a proposal to facilitate taxonomic services in biodiversity assessment and measurements. The Pennsylvania State University, Institutes of the Environment, Center for BioDiversity Research

  • Kim KC (2006b) A proposal for advancing exploration, assessment and conservation of bioresources in the Asia-Pacific World. The Pennsylvania State University, Institutes of the Environment, Center for BioDiversity Research

  • Kim KC, Weaver RD (eds) (1994) Biodiversity and landscapes: a paradox of humanity. Cambridge University Press, New York

  • Knapp S (2000) What’s in a name? Nature 408:33

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kosztarab M, Schaefer CW (eds) (1990) Systematics of the North American insects and arachnids: status and needs. Information Series 90-1, Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia

  • Kremen C (2005) Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecol Lett 8:468–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee I-K, Kim KC, Cho JM, Lee DW, Cho DS, Yoo JS (eds) (1994) Biodiversity Korea 2000: a strategy to save, study and sustainably use Korea’s biotic resources (in Korean). Minumsa, Seoul

  • Levin S (2005) Self-organization and the emergence of complexity in ecological systems. Bioscience 55:1075–1079

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindroth CH (1973) Systematics specializes between Fabricius and Darwin: 1800–1859. In: Smith RF, Mittler TE, Smith CN. History of entomology. Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, pp 119–154

  • Linnaeus C von (1751) Philosophia botanica, in qua explicanture fundamenta botanica, cum difinitionibus partium, exemplis terminorum, observationibus rariorum, adjecctis figures aeneis. Stockholmiae, i–ix, pp 1–362

  • Linnaeus C von (1758) Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species cum characteribus, differntiis, synonymis, locis, Editio Decima, reformata, Tomus I. Lauarentii Salvii, Homiae

  • Liu J, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Luck G (2003) Effects of household dynamics on resource consumption and biodiversity. Nature 421:530–533

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loraeu M, Oteng-Yeboah A, Arroyo MTK, Babin D, Barbault R, Donoghue M, Gadgil M, Hauser C, Heip C, Larigauderie A, Ma K, Mace G, Mooney HA, Perrrings C, Raven P, Sarukan J, Schei P, Scholes RJ, Watson RT (2006) Commentary: diversity without representation. Nature 442:245–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovelock J (2005) Gaia and the theory of the living planet. Gardner’s Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubchenco J (1998) Entering the century of the environment: a new social contract for science. Science 279:491–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundmark C (2003) BioBlitz: getting into backyard biodiversity. Bioscience 54:329

    Google Scholar 

  • Mac MJ, Opler PA, Puckett Haecker CE, Doran PD (1998) Status and trends of the national biological resources, 2 vols. US Department of Interior, US Geological Survey, Reston, vol 1, pp 1–436; vol 2, pp 437–964

  • Mace GM (2004) The role of taxonomy in species conservation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 359:711–719

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahan CG, Sullivan K, Kim KC, Yahner RH, Abrams M (1998) Ecosystem profile assessment of biodiversity: sampling protocols and procedures. Final Report, USDI, National Park Service, Mid-Atlantic Region

  • Mahan C, Kim KC, Sullivan K, Schrot A, Boone JH, Byers R (2004) Biodiversity associated with eastern hemlock forests: assessment and classification of invertebrate biodiversity within Shenandoah National Park. US Department of Interior, National Park Service, Northeast Region, Natural Resources Stewardship and Science, Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR-2004/001

  • Mascia MB, Brosius JP, Dobson TA, Forbes BC, Horowitz L, McKean MA, Turner NJ (2003) Conservation and the social sciences. Conserv Biol 17:649–650

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E, Ashlock PD (1991) Principles of systematic zoology, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill College, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity and conservation. Bioscience 52:883–890

    Google Scholar 

  • MEA: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis report. Island, Washington

  • Miller JR (2005) Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience. Trends Ecol Evol 20:430–434

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mittermeier RA, Myers N, Gill PC, Mittermeier CG (2000) Hotspots: earth’s richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregion. CEMEX, Mexico City

  • MONGABAY.COM (2006) Pictures of newly discovered species in New uinea.Mongabay.com, February 2, 2006. http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0206-ng.html

  • Mooney HA, McNeely JA, Neville LE, Schei PJ, Waage JK (eds) (2004) Invasive alien species: searching for solutions. Island, Washington

  • Musser G (2005) The climax of humanity. Sci Am 293:44–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N (1988) Threatened biotas: “hot spots” in tropical forests. Environmentalist 8:120

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers N (1990) The biodiversity challenge: expanded hot spots analysis. Environmentalist 10:243–256

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Naheem S, Li S (1997) Biodiversity enhances ecosystem predictability. Nature 390:162–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Nature Editor’s Summary (2006) Ecological complexity untangled. Nature 442:245

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC (National Research Council, Board of Agriculture) (1996) Ecologically based pest management: new solutions for a new century. National Academy, Washington

  • Olden JD, Rooney TP (2006) On defining and quantifying biotic homogenization. Global Ecol Biogeogr 15:113–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MA, Bernhardt E, Chornesky E, Collins S, Dobson A, Duke C, Gold B, Jacobson R, Kingsland S, Kranz R, Mappin M, Martinez ML, Micheli F, Morse J, Pace M, Pascual M, Palumbi S, Reichman OJ, Simons A, Townsend A, Turner M (2004) Ecology for a crowded planet. Science 304:1251–1252

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pellet J, Guisan A, Perrin N (2004) A concentric analysis of the impact of urbanization on the threatened European tree frog in an agricultural landscape. Conserv Biol 18:1599–1606

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel D, Wilson C, McCullum C, Huang R, Dwen P, Flack J, Tran Q, Saltman T, Cliff B (1997) Economic and environmental benefits of biodiversity. Bioscience 47:747–757

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimm SL (1991) The balance of nature?: ecological issues in the conservation of species and communities. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Prugh T (1995) Natural capital and human economic survival. ISEE Press, Solomons

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven PH (ed) (1997) Nature and human society: the quest for a sustainable world. Proceedings of the 1997 forum on biodiversity, board of biology, National Research Council. National Academy, Washington

  • Raven PH (2002) Science, sustainability and the human prospect. Science 297:954–958

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Redford KH, Richter BD (1999) Conservation of biodiversity in a world of use. Conserv Biol 13:1246–1256

    Google Scholar 

  • Redman CL, Grove JM, Kuby LH (2004) Integrating social science into the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) network: social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems 7:161–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid WV (1998) Biodiversity hotspots. Trends Ecol Evol 13:275–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs RE (2004) A comprehensive framework for global patterns in biodiversity. Ecol Lett 7:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooney N, McCann K, Gellner G, Moore JC (2006) Structural asymmetry and the stability of diverse food webs. Nature 442:265–269

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML (2003) Win-win ecology: how the earth’s species can survive in the midst of human enterprise. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Salwasser H, Caplan JA, Cartwright CW, Doyle AT, Kessler WB, Marcot BG, Stritch L (1996) Conserving biological diversity through ecosystem management. In: Szaro RC, Johnston DW (eds) Biodiversity unmanaged landscapes: theory and practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 548–573

    Google Scholar 

  • Scientific American Editorial (2005) Crossroads for planet earth. A plan for a bright future beyond 2050. Scientific American (Special Issue) September 2005. www.sciam.com

  • Savage JM (1995) Systematics and the biodiversity crisis. Bioscience 45:673–679

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherber C, Mwangi PN, Temperton VM, Roscher C, Schumacher J, Schmid B, Weisser WW (2006) Effects of plant diversity on invertebrate herbivory in experimental grassland. Oecologia 147:489–500

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger WH (2006) Global change ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 21:348–351

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schluter D (2001) Ecology and the origin of species. Trends Ecol Evol 16:372–380

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz MW, Jurjavcic NL, O’Brian JM (2002) Conservation’s disenfranchised urban poor. Bioscience 52:601–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Shigesata N, Kawasaki K (1997) Biological invasions: theory and practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Shochat E, Warren PS, Faeth SH, McIntyre NE, Hope D (2006) From pattern to process in mechanistic urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol (in press)

  • Sodhi NS, Koh LP, Brook BW, Ng PKL (2004) Southeast Asian biodiversity: an impending disaster. Trends Ecol Evol 19:654–660

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Solbrig OT, van Emden HM, van Oordt PGWJ (eds) (1994) Biodiversity and global change. CAB International, Wallingford, UK

  • Stenseth NC, Mysterud A, Ottersen G, Hurrel JW, Chan K-S, Lima M (2002) Ecological effects of climate fluctuations. Science 297:1292–1296

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stork N, Davies J (1996) Biodiversity inventories. In: Biodiversity assessment. A guide to good practice. Field manual 1. Data and specimen collection of plants, fungi and microorganisms. Vol 2: collecting biodiversity data 1. HMSO, London, pp 1–34

  • Straub CS, Snyder WE (2006) Species identity dominates the relationship between predator biodiversity and herbivore suppression. Ecology 87:277–282

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Symstad AJ, Tilman D, Wilson J, Knops JMH (1998) Species loss and ecosystem functioning: effects of species identity and community composition. Oikos 81:389–397

    Google Scholar 

  • The Biodiversity Project (1998) Engaging the public on biodiversity: a road map for education and communication strategies. The Biodiversity Project, Madison

  • The Biodiversity Project (2002) Americans and biodiversity: new perspectives in 2002. Biodiversity Project. Belden Russonello and Stewart, Washington

  • Turner WR, Nakamura T, Dinetti M (2004) Global urbanization and the separation of humans from nature. Bioscience 54:585–590

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuxen SL (1973) Entomology systematizes and describes: 1700–1815. In: Smith RF, Mittler TE, Smith CN (eds) History of entomology. Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, pp 95–118

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (2002) United Nations Environment Programme. Report on the sixth meeting of the conference to the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. UNEP/CBD/COP/6/20. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-06/official/cop-06-20-en.pdf (accessed May 2005)

  • US Congress Office of Technology Assessment (1995) Biologically based technologies for pest control. OTS-ENV-636. US Government Printing Office, Washington

  • USGS/DOI (US Geological survey, Department of Interior) (2001) BioBlitz: a tool for biodiversity exploration, education, and investigation. Bio-Blitz home Page, USGS. http://www.im.nbs.gov/blitz.html (6/5/01)

  • Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo J (1997) Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–499

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Warwick RM, Clarke KR (1995) New ‘biodiversity’ measures reveal a decrease in taxonomic distinctness with increasing stress. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 129:301–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler QD (2004) Taxonomic triage and the poverty of phylogeny. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 359:571–583

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler QD, Raven PH, Wilson EO (2004) Taxonomy: impediment or expedient? Science 303:285

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (1984) Biophilia: the human bond with other species. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (1989) The coming pluralization of biology and the stewardship of systematics. Bioscience 39:242–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (2002) The future of life. Knopf, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO, Peter FM (1988) Biodiversity. National Academy, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson KA, McBride MF, Bode M, Possingham HP (2006) Prioritizing global conservation efforts. Nature 440:337–340

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Worldwatch Institute, The state of the world (1984–2005). Norton, New York

  • Wortley AH, Bennett JR, Scotland RW (2002) Taxonomy and phylogeny reconstruction: two distinct research agendas in systematics. Edinburgh J Bot 59:335–349

    Google Scholar 

  • WRI, IUCN, UNEP (1992) Global Biodiversity Strategy: Guidelines for Action to Save, study, and Use Earth’s Biotic Wealth Sustainability and Equitability World Resources Institute (WRI), The Wild Conservation Union (IUCN), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

  • Zedan H (2005) INSIGHTS: biodiversity essential for existence of life. Environmental News Service, 1–27 January 2005. http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2005/2005-01-27-]iczed.asp

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ke Chung Kim.

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, K.C., Byrne, L.B. Biodiversity loss and the taxonomic bottleneck: emerging biodiversity science. Ecol Res 21, 794–810 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-006-0035-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-006-0035-7

Keywords

Navigation