The Need for a Uniform System of Biological Numericlature

Abstract

Dawn of the age of automation, computers, and mechanized data retrieval is upon us. Whether we consider it boon or bane is quite irrelevant. It is here to stay. Biologists, paleontologists, and other life scientists must begin to formulate some comprehensive system to take advantage of these new concepts and methodologies. Traditional systems of information, processing, publication, and retrieval are already threatened with breakdown at even today's rate of accumulation of information. Necessity has caused most larger institutions to utilize these new methods already, but in uncoordinated and differently systematized schemes. There is, as yet, no standard conversion factor among independent systems relating to the biological sciences. The time for development of a system for biological sciences is now. If we do not step forward and define the limits, criteria, and format for such a general system we may find that solutions to these problems have been instituted by others but in a fashion which may not be fully in line with the present and future needs of the biological sciences. The system should: a) be simple enough to be easily adopted, b) be flexible, in order that it not break down or require basic revision because of growth and future nomenclatural changes, c) follow the biological system, not bringing further strain to taxonomy through the pressure of its own organization. Limited experience with small data retrieval and coding systems specifically bears out this need for maximum growth potential. The small systems I set up, while a graduate student, were designed to achieve limited goals. The result was a series of systems, each limited to one specific problem. Had $500 more in time and materials been spent at the outset, a comprehensive system could have been achieved. The cost of revising these now mature and enlarged systems into a single comprehensive one, useful to all workers in the field, today might be $5,000. The sorting of specimens collected during the University of SouLthern California Antarctic Research Program was originally set up with a limited short-range system which could not be coherently expanded to cover unforeseen groups and necessary subdivisions into smaller component groups. The cost of foresight in this case would have been in hours and tens of dollars. The cost to revise the system in order to meet adequately only the present and probable needs of this one project must be measured in terms of weeks or months and hundreds or thousands of dollars. The advent of the National Oceanographic Data Center, the Smithsonian Oceanographic Sorting Center, and others, emphasizes that we must lose no time through reticence or postponement. One can only guess at the expense and time a major revision of a series of inadequate systems will cost. In the data retrieval system of the National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) (U. S. Navy Hydro. Off., 1960), physical oceanographic data are retrieved only