Coordinating the traditional and modern approaches in the systematics of insects

Abstract

The problem of coordinating the traditional and modern approaches to systematics is ever-lasting due to the continuous development and enrichment of our knowledge of biodiversity, means of analysis, and concepts. Comparative morphology was and still is the cornerstone of studies of insect taxonomy. It gives the most extensive and diverse information on the organisms studied, particularly when it is supported by the data on embryology and functional morphology as well as by analysis of adaptive significance of morphological characters. The limitations of this approach are often related to the presence of homoplasies, reversions, etc. Comparative paleontology is the only approach providing direct evidence of the historical succession of taxa and their characters. However, this approach is fully applicable only to some groups due to the specific features of their morphology and taphonomy. All the modern approaches (molecular, cytogenetic, etc.) are very informative but also have their own limitations; they should not be contrasted with the traditional approaches and certainly should not replace them. The traditional approaches do not become obsolete; it is only their comparative importance in the set of taxonomic tools that may be reevaluated. No single approach can be considered universal for an unambiguous reconstruction of phylogeny and substantiation of the natural system of taxa. Each approach has its own advantages and limitations, and only combined use of different approaches allows a broader range of the problems to be solved. Different approaches may prevail in the studies of different groups of insects and at different levels of taxonomic hierarchy. The intuition of the taxonomist, which is so often criticized by the followers of “objective” systematics, is based on taxonomic experience and scope of knowledge of a particular taxon. It does not imply a subjective bias, but allows the taxonomist to choose the instruments adequate to a particular case.