Gaps in marine taxonomy resources in Europe

1
Gaps in marine taxonomy resources in Europe

• Leigh Marine Laboratory, University of Auckland,
  New Zealand.
• m.costello_at_auckland.ac.nz
• Ecological Consultancy Services Ltd (EcoServe),
  Ireland
• Muséum National dHistoire Naturelle, Paris,
  France
• National and Capodistrian University of Athens,
  Greece

• Mark J. Costello
• Chris S. Emblow
• Philippe Bouchet
• Anastasios Legakis

2
Taxonomic resources

• People taxonomists, identification skills
• Identification guides
• Collections of specimens
• Inventories of species

3
This talk

• Aim what are gaps in taxonomic resources for
  marine biodiversity in Europe?
• What we did project, ouputs, scope
• Expectations
• What we found
• Implications for research and management

4
The project European Register of Marine Species

• EU part-funded project
• 22 partner organisations
• 170 participating scientists
• 385,000 euro, 2 years
• communication with 42 organisations
• Data management plan
• Intellectual Property Rights Agreement

• Aim of external communications
• data exchange
• awareness of project
• invite end-user comments
• maximise synergy of effort, minimise overlap
• stimulate related activities
• foster collaboration
• promote use of results

5
ERMS - outputs

• Web site providing results
• Book listing marine species
• Register of 600 experts (in 37 countries) in
  European marine species identification
• Bibliography of 840 identification guides
• Gaps in identification expertise and guides,
  knowledge of species groups, and marine species
  collections
• New scientific society for the long term
  management of biodiversity data (intellectual
  property)
• Model and foundation for future projects (e.g.
  Fauna Europaea, BIOMARE, MARBEF)

Costello, M. J., Emblow, C and White R.
(editors) 2001. European Register of Marine
Species. A check-list of marine species in Europe
and a bibliography of guides to their
identification. Patrimoines naturels 50, 1-463.
ISBN 2-85653-538-0 ISSN 1281-6213
6
ERMS scope

• North Pole to 26oN
• Mid-Atlantic Ridge to Black Sea
• 0.5 ppt to deep-sea
• Excluded
• Saltmarshes
• Lichens, diatoms, cyanobacteria, bacteria

7
Our expectations

• species total 20,000 25,000
• identification guides decreasing adequacy with
  smaller body size taxa
• taxonomists - most 60-70 years of age
• collections most in museums

8
How many species?

• Listed
• 30,000
• 4,000 omitted
• 2,000 to be described
• 36,000 total
• Experts under-estimated by 40-60 !

• 88 experts compiled species lists
• No Mediterranean lists for Rotifera and
  Brachiopoda
• No list for non-halacarid Acarina

9
Weaker lists

• Preliminary lists
• Crytophytes
• heterotrophic euglenoids
• Haptophytes
• Prasinophytes

• Compiled from literature
• Apicomplexa (free-living species)
• Dinoflagellates
• Kathablepharids
• Placozoa
• Ctenophora
• Rotifera
• Hirudinea
• Thermosbaenacea
• Isopoda excluding Epicaridea
• Brachiopoda
• Appendicularia
• Cephalochordata

10
Geographic coverage may be incomplete

• Protists
• Ciliates aloricate oligotrichs
• Ciliates Chonotricha
• Ciliates folliculinids
• Ciliates Rhynchodida
• Amoebae testate
• Apusomonads
• Choanoflagellates
• Euglenids - kinetoplastids
• Bicosoecids
• Labyrinthulids
• Thaustrochytrids
• Stramenopiles incertae sedis
• Thaumatomonads
• Protista incertae sedis (heterotrophic species)
• Amoebae naked
• Xenophyophora

• Non-protist
• Mesozoa
• Gnathostomulida
• Euphausiacea
• Hemichordata
• Fungi
• Porifera
• Siphonophora
• Chilopoda
• Diplopoda
• Insecta
• Phoronida

11
Geographic coverage complete

• Arthropods
• Pycnogonida
• Remipedia
• Branchiura
• Cladocera
• Mystacocarida
• Copepoda
• Tantulocarida
• Cirripedia
• Decapoda
• Mysidacea
• Isopoda
• Insecta
• Stomatopoda
• Acarina
• Ostracoda
• Amphipoda
• Cumacea
• Tanaidacea

• Worms
• Cestoda
• Nemertea
• Acanthocephala
• Turbellaria
• Aspidogastrea
• Digenea
• Monogenea
• Oligochaeta
• Nematoda
• Polychaeta
• Pogonophora

• Foraminifera
• Actiniaria
• Antipatharia
• Hydrozoa
• Octocorallia
• Scleractinia
• Cubozoa
• Scyphozoa
• Ascidiacea
• Thaliacea
• Pisces
• Tetrapoda
• Bryozoa
• Cycliophora
• Entoprocta
• Echinodermata

• Other taxa
• Macroalgae
• Seagrass
• Chaetognatha
• Myxozoa
• Gastrotrichia
• Cephalorhyncha ( Loricifera, Priapulida,
  Kinorhyncha, Nematomorpha)
• Tardigrada
• Echiura
• Sipuncula
• Pentastomida
• Mollusca

12
Rates of species discovery
All species
13
Major benthic, some pelagic
14
Meiofauna parasites
15
Bryozoa in Europe and New Zealand


Europe
New Zealand
16
Coverage of identification guides

• 842 guides
• 43 published in special series (e.g. Synopses
  British Fauna)

• 58 Northern Europe
• 26 Mediterranean
• 11 Lusitanian - Macronesia

17
Trends in publications of guides
18
More guides/number species for more conspicuous
taxa
19
Expertise

• Database 1,200 persons in 38 countries (29
  European countries)
• 614 respondents
• 80 employed in public sector (including
  universities)

20
Identification taxonomic expertise by taxa
Positive but poor correlations between
species/taxa and number of identificiation and
taxonomic experts
21
Age structure of all experts
Average age 47 Range 23 to 89 Taxonomists older
than identification experts (ecologists?)
22
State of specimen collections

• 500 questionnaires
• 80 institutes responsed

• ½ in universities !

23
State of specimen collections

• 60 managed by lt 4 staff
• ½ global coverage of species
• ¼ limited to national species
• 60 have type specimens
• 8 institutes gt 10,000 specimens
• 60 institutes lt 1,000 specimens

• How well catalogued?
• 20 - none
• 36 - complete
• 40 - no electronic
• 10 - full electronic

24
Expectations and findings

• species
• 20,000 to 25,000
• taxonomists
• most 60-70 years of age
• identification guides
• decreasing adequacy with smaller body size taxa
• collections
• most in museums

• 36,000 !
• Average age 47
• True, but also less for southern European seas
• Most in universities, all poorly resourced,
  catalogues insufficient

25
Conclusions

• High rates discovery in these taxa
• most diverse least least well known
• thousands species remain to be discovered
• Know less conspicuous taxa least
• more guides required in these groups
• More ident guides for southern European species
• No evidence of taxonomists going extinct
• Collections not limited to museums, most poorly
  catalogued
• Awareness, knowledge inaccessible as not in
  databases

26
How to fill gaps?

• Revise and expand checklist (ERMS 2.0)
• Fund guides to southern European taxa
• Focus taxonomic and ecological studies on least
  well known taxa in least well studied places