Slashdot Mirror
600 New Species of Fish Discovered
zenobr writes "Some 300 scientists from 53 countries are creating a record of all known marine life, in a project reminiscent of an aquatic Domesday Book. So far more than 15,000 species of fish have been catalogued and 2 to 3 thousand more are expected to be catalogued before the project's end in 2010. Over 500 of the fish catalogued thus far are thought to be new to science. Full story on BBC News"
Maybe they didn't mean Doomsday book. Maybe it should have been DOMESDAY book. The Domesday book was basically a census ordered by William the Conquerer about 20 years after the invasion.
You can find out more at:
http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk/
The Domesday Book was the complete account of the lands and people of the nation of England undertaken by William the Conqueror in 1085-86. It bears no resemblance to the science fiction novel cited in the link.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Species are defined as being unable to cross breed a viable offspring. There is only one species of dog, but many subspecies, which gets many people confused. Collie and German shepard are subspecies, Dog (canis familiaris) is the species.
When life gives you crap, Make Crapade.
Sluggy Freelance.
Actually, this isn't the case. Species are simply populations that *tend* not to breed together -- for example, dogs (Canis familiaris), wolves (Canis lupus) and coyotes (Canis latrans) can breed together just fine and produce viable offspring, but because matings are relatively rare, they are still counted as separate species.
Well, the first thing you have to learn about taxonomy is that stripes and dots don't count. Ever see the stripes and dots on a dinosaur? Neither has anyone else.
Form, not color. A rose by any other color is still a rose.
Taxonomically speaking the only difference between an Atlantic Salmon and a Rainbow Trout ( which has different colored dots and its famous red stripe) is. . . two teeth.
(Yes, for those taking notes, that means that the Rainbow Trout is really the Pacific Salmon and the "Pacific Salmon" aren't. The Brook Trout and the Lake Trout aren't trout or salmon. They're Char. That's what happens when you let the "people" name things before the taxonomists get there).
KFG
They "real" science you want will be affected later in all sorts of ways...now that they have many more samples & ideas to draw from when looking for new cures for diseases.
As much as non-biological science people think we know about the organisms on this planet, we really don't know jack. The reason we are always finding more species is a result of two different phases of taxonomic research; Alpha and Beta. Alpha taxonomy is that basic, initial "I found this and it is different" phase. Usually, this happens in relatively unexplored areas (such as the oceans), or in relatively unexplored groups of organisms, such as Oomycetes or Tropical microlepidoptera (or in fishes). There really are a lot of places filled with organisms previously unknown to science. For example, I am currently describing three new species of ferns from Cuba, one from Jamaica, and five from the Chaco of Paraguay and Bolivia. Humans don't know everything.
A lot of species today are found through further taxonomic research (i.e., Beta taxonomy). For example, many taxa are morphologically very similar, but genetically disparate. Each year in the United States a large number of species are discovered because of this type of research.
And to those who may think that there is something wrong or shocking that we keep finding new species, just stop to think about how many people actually do this kind of research. For example, I study fern systematics, and there are less than 20 people who are actively doing this research in the world. When you get in to many animal groups, the ratio of species to scientists is much worse, so we will be discovering new species for a very long time, unless of course we wipe them all out!
And what do you mean you don't get to name the species you discover? Of course you do, that's how they get named!
The aquatic ecosystem is important for food and recreation. But fish populations are under stress worldwide. In the Netherlands, workers used to get their employers to provide lunch, but negotiated the maximum number of times per week salmon would be served. They couldn't get an employer to pay for salmon anymore.
In North America, the Atlantic salmon is a farm FrankenFish, fed Fish Pellets until they are big and then pumped full of carrot extract to get that "natural" orange color before processing.
While some of these species may seem insignificant, it is important to catalog and understand them to assess the health and viability of ecosystems.
Then again, the whole world is slaughtering fish in the oceans to the point that the most productive fisheries are under serious pressure. So if we can wipe out ubiquitous species, how can we hope to preserve those in sensitive habitats that come under pressure?
Well, at least we will have some descriptions and pictures.
Just 2 cents from a catch and release, barbless hooks fly fisher.
Actually, there are 200 fish species described as new every year. And it has been like that for the last twenty years. BTW, check out www.fishbase.org, the best site there is on fish. H.U.G.E. database.
:) No, I won't tell you their name; please, let G3ck0G33k have some his mysteries of his own. :)
Oh, some bragging rights on behalf of myself... I have described three new fish species myself; giving them scientific names and all that.
True, we are discovering new species all of the time, but there are several reasons why.
The first is that classifications are always changing. Scientists are always finding new methods/means to further divide an existing group of organisms based on some structure (existence of bones, arrangement of bones, habitat differentiation, etc.).
If I remember correctly, during one lecture a professor mentioned that two fish, virtually identical in outward appearance, lived within several feet vertically of each other, but for some reason I can't remember now, someone caught some of each, dissected them and found that they were different enough internally to classify them as two separate species.
Second, the total number of fishes believed to be in existence as of 1993 - 1994, was around 22,000 to 24,000. So at 15,000 catalogued so far, we still have a ways to go even with finding several hundred new species a year. Remember, we know more about the surface of the moon than we do about the deep ocean.
Also, one of the graduate students in Marine Biology that I knew found 2 or 3 new species during his thesis work.
So, it's not that the scientists are not doing their job, it's just that the system used to classify species developed by Carl Linnaeus is being modified when some new specie is found and this can cause other species to be reclassified. Kind of like a ripple effect.
By the way, you do get to name the new species that you find with a few simple rules. You can't name it after yourself and it must pass through a standards committee.
Rejoice in your insanity, there really is no other way