Reacción a "Knowledge of biodiversity is advancing faster than species loss"

Human activity is impacting planetary biodiversity. The massive metabolism of the naked primate consumes resources (space, food, materials of all kinds) and releases byproducts (toxins, nutrients, organic matter) that directly or indirectly limit, impede, or hinder the lives of many other beings that make up the biosphere. The result is the Sixth Extinction, caused by a single, seemingly conscious species, about which we have insufficient knowledge in terms of its taxonomic impact. Organisms never before described, completely unknown, are becoming extinct. Some of these disappearances may be jeopardizing taxonomic categories above the species level, which would be especially serious. Sometimes what becomes extinct is not just a particular species, but a genus, a family, or even more. The jarabugo is a small fish, a highly threatened endemic cyprinid of the Guadiana basin, found only in a few locations along this Iberian river. This species, Anaecypris hispanica, belongs to a monotypic genus, and its extinction would result in two losses: the loss of the species and the loss of the genus itself. There are no other representatives within it. However, the Iberian barbel, for example, another endemic species exclusive to the same basin, belonging to the genus Luciobarbus, coexists in the Guadiana River with two other barbels of the same genus. Its extinction, irreparable as a species, would have fewer taxonomic consequences than that of the Iberian barbel because two other Luciobarbus species still inhabit this river (in addition to others in other areas, both in the Iberian Peninsula and beyond).

Wiens et al. observe that science, with the incorporation of new tools, new technologies, and sufficient budgetary resources, is rapidly expanding our knowledge of biodiversity, of the richness of life on Earth. This could generate the false impression of a slowdown in the mass extinction process that humanity has unleashed. Nothing could be further from the truth. Simply put, our knowledge of the richness of life is limited, and we only account for what is already known, which is itself demonstrably increasing. The authors of the article estimate that more than 700 new genera, more than 20 families, and more than 3 orders are described each year, always associated with the discovery of new species. In the case of the lower categories, this process is statistically partly dependent on accumulated knowledge: more genera are described from groups with more species, mostly arthropods. However, for higher taxonomic ranks—family, order, or class—descriptions are mainly made among the least known groups, usually microscopic marine organisms or host-dependent parasites.

Current estimates of the value of global biodiversity are 8.75 million species. A very significant implication of this important work considerably raises this figure. The accelerated rate at which different taxonomic levels are described, from species to class, should compel a revision of the calculations used to estimate planetary biodiversity, which would be far greater than the aforementioned estimate, probably tens, if not hundreds, of millions of species.

Given the much greater significance of the extinction of a higher taxonomic rank, Wiens et al. conclude their article by urging researchers to focus their efforts on describing the lesser-known biodiversity among the higher categories for which data is scarce, before their premature extinction. It will always be more difficult for well-studied orders or families to provide new benefits to humanity than for rarer ones. The loss of the Spanish snail would be, in some ways, more irreparable than that of the short-headed barbel, although neither should ever become extinct due to a species capable of anticipating the consequences of its actions.