On species concepts, species delimitation criteria, taxonomy committees, and biases: a response to Lima (2022a)

Abstract

AbstractIn a recent commentary, Lima (Ornithol Res 30:225–228, 2022a) claims that the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee (CBRO) bases its species ranking decisions on a misinterpretation of the general lineage species concept (GLSC), with two major detrimental consequences: (1) misinform the Brazilian ornithological community about the nature of interspecific limits and (2) mislead the users of the CBRO checklist “…about the nature of the taxa it contains.” Here, I review the arguments behind Lima’s (Ornithol Res 30:225–228, 2022a) claims and demonstrate that they are unfounded and stem from an inaccurate interpretation of the GLSC coupled with a lack of understanding the differences between the inherent theoretical nature of species concepts and their actual implementation in real-life situations by taxonomists in general and taxonomy committees in particular. Accordingly, I provide several examples of recent taxonomic treatments implemented by the CBRO, confirming the GLSC as the species concept guiding species ranking decisions in the committee. If not addressed properly, unsubstantiated commentaries such as that put forward by Lima (Ornithol Res 30:225–228, 2022a) — which cast serious doubts on the standards upon which the checklists of the CBRO are produced — may have the unintended effect of amplifying the current representation bias against Latin American ornithologists in global initiatives such as the publication of a single worldwide avian checklist.