Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference “Research and Education in the Natural Sciences”, November 15-16, 2013 Shkodër – Albania, Volume 1: 309-314.

Vicious circle in the biodiversity study

Dhimitër Dhora

University of Shkodra “Luigj Gurakuqi”, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Biology - Chemistry

ABSTRACT

Here are ascertained and argued with examples numerous and frequent taxonomic revisions, where species to be joined in synonymy or to be devided in other species, subspecies convert in species, or or vice versa, the implementations in systems based only on phenetic etc. Often occur returns back, or recyclings. These occur because the identification and evaluation information is partial, without data on the distribution, polymorphism, population variation, individual development, development of populations in time, bilateral ties between taxa etc. Therefore, in order to accurate the taxonomic studies, it is necessary to be included in the complex biological studies. This will also allow more accurate assessment of the real number of species, as well as the phenomenon of endemism. Reforming of taxonomic studies, so naturally, will promote the reforming of databases, giving "certified" species, based on classified information. It is puted the need to get out from the vicious circle in the study of biodiversity, passing to a spiral development, which creates the conditions to realize in practice the saying that behind every study occur the renewal of knowledges and theory.

Introduction

From my experience in the study of molluscs of Albania, but especially in the compilation of as must accurate and adjuarned lists of species of molluscs, I have ascertained a problem that has permanently accompanied me till today: how much revisions occur, how much species to be joined in synonymy or to be devided in other species, how subspecies convert in species, or vice versa, how long this phenomenon is continued, and how much returns back are happening. This happened to me when I get to the list of fishes (Dhora 2009), also with the register of species of fauna of Albania, I published a few years ago Dhora (2010b). My concern turns into intention to write an article after I met two materials published recently. Three years ago Boero (2010) in his communication, on the study of species in the era of biodiversity, writes that when a species is named and described phenotipically, we have not knowledge on the variation, life cycle, ecology, its role in communities and ecosystems. For the most of described species, we know only the name and features of adults. The author draws attention that, in the global scale, we are destroying the taxonomic expertise, following a false modernization, financing and based mainly on molecular . The advantage of molecular approaches to the study of biodiversity is not justified. Organisms are not just molecules and life is not just chemistry. Therefore, the author emphasizes, we must study biodiversity in all aspects, from phenotype to genotype, ecological niche, life cycles, populations, communities. Last time I got in my hand the voluminous publication of Welter - Schultes (2012). I think the author has applied the criteria "filter" to choose the mollusc species for this volume. Many species have gone "filter" and are included in this book, but many others are not included, for reasons that clearly explains the author. In this article is ascertained that identifying information, without data on the distribution, polymorphism, population variation, individual development, development of populations in time, bilateral ties between taxa etc. has made the study of biodiversity to enter into a vicious circle. It is necessary the taxonomic studies to be included in the complex of biological studies, as well as the reform of database, giving "certified" species, based on the classified information. Establishing of the biodiversity study in a spiral development, will create opportunities that after each study, to occur the renewal of knowledges and the theory.

Examples for argument

Bithynia in Lake of Shkodra Dhora & Welter - Schultes (1996) give only one species of this genus in the Lake of Shkodra, Bithynia tentaculata (Linnaeus 1758). Pesic & Gloer (2013) give five species of this genus, of which three discovered of them: Bithynia zeta Gloer & Pesic 2007, B. radomani Gloer & Pesic 2007, B. skadarskii Gloer & Pesic 2007, B. montenegrina (Wohlberedt 1901), B. hambergerae Reischutz, A., Reischutz, N. & Reischutz, P. L. 2008, all endemic, three to the waters of the lake and two of its water basin. Welter - Schultes (2012) recognizes only two species of this genus across Europe: Bithynia tentaculata (Linnaeus 1758) and Bithynia leachii (Scheppard 1823). He does not justify the Bithynia gender division in five species, as presented above, since, as the author writes, have not been studied in detail the bilateral ties between these "local forms", as he calls it, distributed areas, the nature of morphological and anatomic variation in the spatial and population level.

Montenegrina Its areal is Albania and its near parts of Montenegro, Macedonia and Greece. Dhora (2008) listed 23 species and 57 subspecies. Eross et al. (2006) presented as news two species and 24 subspecies of the gen. Montenegrina in Albania and nearby countries. Nordsieck (2009) revised this genus, divided into 7 groups, which included 22 species and 58 subspecies. Dedov & Neubert (2009) increased this number to 90. Dhora (2010a) coming back to this genus, listed 21 species and 67 subspecies. Welter - Schultes (2012) in genus Montenegrina presents 19 species, which consider justified, but gives the idea that perhaps there could be only seven species, with a high degree of variations of the spatial character.

Lymnaea stagnalis Linnaeus (1758) gives two species of this genus: Lymnaea stagnalis and Lymnaea fragilis. Westerlund (1885) and Hubendick (1951) consider Lymnaea fragilis synonymous of Lymnaea stagnalis. Dhora (1988), based on the literature of 1980 years, write that in Lymnaea stagnalis are determined 11 species, 6 for Europe and 5 for Canada. Bank (2011) gives for Europe two species of the genus Lymnaea: Lymnaea stagnalis (Linnaeus 1758) and Lymnaea raphidia (Bourguignat 1860), while A. & P. L. Reischuetz (2009) consider last species as a subspecies of first species, Lymnaea stagnalis raphidia Bourguignat 1860, but in latter publication, A., N., P. L. Reischuetz (2012), consider as species Lymnaea raphidia (Bourguignat 1860). Welter - Schultes (2012) considers all as a single species, Lymnaea stagnalis (Linnaeus 1758).

Discussion

Identification based on comprehensive information Today, more and more, are published discoveries of new species. But immediately after its publication, group to be revised and together with it all the species or subspecies, newly discovered. Adjustments are made because the information for identification has been biased, without the necessary information on the distribution, polymorphism, population variation, individual development, development of populations in time, bilateral ties between taxa etc.

Exact implementation of taxa in the systema An important object of the science of taxonomy is the implementation of taxa in system. Modern taxonomic systems are based on evolution, therefore the implementation should be done with two components: the determination of the branching point, which is related to the analysis of affinities between the features of new species and ancestors, and the divergence degree, dealing with the analysis of the features affinities between all species. Such a task is realized by the population studies, ecology, biogeography, paleontology, etc. We stress that the geographical and ecological factors are decisive in evolutionary assessments for taxa historical forming, especially the forming of species, but also their genus before, and subspecies, often numerous, behind them.

Recognition of individuals polymorphism and populations variation It should be recognized the populations to know polymorphic species features and variation of populations, in terms of polymorphisms. Population should be studied in time, not just in one generation, with a aim to know the features stability, riches and polymorphism dynamics. It should be studied the embryonic development to known features in the different embryonic stages, which also gives knowledge on their historical development, in consequence on the predecessor. It should be seen the features or their polymorphisms in past populations, hundreds or thousands years before, in order to relate the climatic factors with the polymorphic features of each popullation. When this is done, then we can talk about the identification and differentiation of species, because the morphological and molecular features are seen not only to adult forms of a generation, but in the entirely of individuals of several generations and populations, which prove whether are the same traits that are inherited.

Estimation of the number of species The stream of biased taxonomic studies has relatived the valuation of the number of species. This situation continues from the two centuries, even in modern times, with the development of molecular, genetic, biochemical, ecological sciences, the problem is more clearly displayed. Assessments and discussions are entered in cramp, because the study of biodiversity has entered in a vicious circle. How many species are on Earth Globe? We can not evaluate it correctly, even neither approximately. In the books on biodiversity (Rakaj 2008), are given a lot of data that argue our idea. It is written that from 1982 are described 57 new mammal species, but with the regulated synonymy for 207 species, the number of new species gots to 150. During these years are described around 13.000 new species per year. Therefore, this exact unknowingness of the number relativise the prevision of the real species number in the Earth Globe or it parts. How can get out of this inflation situation, with a lot contradictions, that can not be shaken out from “superfluous water” and mistakes, which block up the classification of information to conclude to the truth? The best way is to occurate the taxonomic studies, that the modern taxonomic studies to be developed in cooperation with the evolutionary, genetic, biogeographic, ecological ones.

Evaluation of the endemism phenomenon From up to now studies, including database, can not be realistically evaluated the endemism phenomenon. As is known, each species is endemic to his area. But we do not know exactly the geographical distribution of the species, therefore the considerations given for endemism, except special cases, such as in the strict isolations etc., are not reliable. We often confound the species with a single or few findings with the endemic species. Time to time we have corrected the assessments on this phenomenon and in consequence many endemic species are revaluated as subendemics, as many sub-endemic species have get out from this status. Here we do not discuss the implications from taxonomic revisions; endemic or sub-endemic species and subspecies to be devaluated, while perhaps to be considered as endemics the others. The best way is to be accurated the taxonomic studies, the modern taxonomic studies to be developed in cooperation with the evolutionary, genetic, biogeographic, ecological ones.

Reforming of database The usage of the information technology has enable to be published and quickly spread the scientific information. This is a great achievement. But together with the spread of information, the database have also served to discover and widespread the problems, that qualified specialists understand better than anyone. As is mentioned above, the biodiversity study should be carried out by groups of experts, taxonomists, ecologists, biogeographs etc. that together will solve the problems at the programmed time. So naturally it will encourage the reform of databases. Database, that will provide this information with the "certified" species, will be available for scientists and indeed will advance the scientific researches. Then the vicious cycle in the biodiversity study will be transformed to a spiral development and thereafter will be realized into practice the saying that, after every study will happen the renewal of knowledges and the theory. It is necessary to be classified the database information, puting to the species the marks of the accuracy degree, as well as the applied identification metods (morphological, anatomical, molecular - genetic, biogeographic, ecological, etc.). This model can be also applied in the different publications, such as fauna, lists, monographs, revisions etc.

References

BANK, R. A. Fauna Europaea. http://www.faunaeur.org, 25 January 2011

BOERO, F. 2010: The study of species in the era of biodiversity: A tale of stupidity. Diversity, 2: 115- 126.

DEDOV, I. & NEUBERT, E. 2009: Contribution to the knowledge of the clausiliid fauna from Republic of Macedonia with description of new taxa (, , ). Archiv für Molluskenkunde 138 (1): 89-101.

DHORA, DH. 1988: Të dhëna më të plota për dy kërmij të vendit tonë. Buletin Shkencor ILP, 2: 131- 133. Shkodër.

DHORA, DH. 2008: On the Montenegrina BOETTGER 1877 diversity. Proceedings of International Conference on Biological and Environmental Sciences (26-28 September). Section of Biodiversity, pp. 436-440. University of Tirana, Faculty of Natural Sciences. Publishing House: EMAL. Tirana. DHORA, DH. (2009): Vlerësime ekogjeografike për peshqit e ujërave të ëmbël të Shqipërisë. Bul. Shk. USh. “Luigj Gurakuqi”, Nr. 59, Seria e Shkencave të Natyrës, fq. 160-189.

DHORA, DH. (2010a): Rivlerësime mbi Montenegrina BOETTGER 1877. Buletin Shkencor U Sh “Luigj Gurakuqi”, Nr. 60, Seria e Shkencave të Natyrës, fq. 91-96. Shkodër.

DHORA, DH. (2010b): Regjistër i specieve të faunës së Shqipërisë 2010. CP. 208 fq. Shkodër.

DHORA, DH. Molusqet / . In “Liqeni i Shkodrës 2012”, CP, fq. 41-55.

DHORA, DH. & WELTER – SCHULTES, F. W. (1996): List of taxa of non –marine molluscs, described from of Albanian localities. Schriften zur Malakozoologie 9: 198 – 223. Cismar / Ostholstein.

EROSS, Z., FEHER, Z. & SZEKERES, M. 2006: New taxa of Montenegrina O. BOETTGER 1877 (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Clausiliidae) from Albania and the neighbourning regions. Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museum in Wien. 107B: 181-208.

HUBENDICK, B. 1951: Recent Lymnaeidae, their variation, morphology, taxonomy, nomenclature, and distribution. Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar (4) 3 (1): 1-223, pl. 1-5. Stockholm.

LINNAEUS, C. 1758: Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus , differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata. pp. (1-4), 1-824. Holmiae. (Salvius)

NORDSIECK, H. 2009: Revision of the genus Montenegrina O. BOETTGER 1877. www.clausilia.de – 03/2008 (06.September 2008).

PESIC, V. & GLOER, P. 2013: A new freshwater snail genus (Hydrobiidae, Gastropoda) from Montenegro, with a discussion on gastropod diversity and endemism in Skadar Lake. ZooKeys 281: 69- 90.

RAKAJ, M. 2008: Biodiversiteti. Botimet “Camaj – Pipa”, p. 43. Shkodër.

REISCHUETZ, A. & REISCHUETZ, P. L. 2009: Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Molluskenfauna von Montenegro, nebst Beschreibung zweier neuer Arten der Gattung Virpazaria GITTENBERGER 1969. Nachrichtenblatt der Ersten Vorarlberger Malakologischen Gesellschaft 17: 51-60, Rankweil.

REISCHUETZ, A., REISCHUETZ, N. & REISCHUETZ, P. L. 2012: Hellenika pantoia, 32. Anmerkungen zur Molluskenfauna der dessaretischen Seen: Grosser und Kleiner Prespe – See (Griechenland, Albanien, Mazedonien). Nachrichtenblatt der Ersten Vorarlberger Malakologischen Gesellschaft 19: 29-34, Rankweil.

UIT DE WEERD, D. R. & GITTENBERGER, E. (2004): Re-evaluating Cringea: molecular data overturn the current classification within the clausiliids subfamily Alopiinae (Gastropoda, Pulmonata). J. Moll. Stud. 70: 305-318

WELTER – SCHULTES, F. W. 2012: European non-marine molluscs, a guide for species identidication. Planet Poster Editions. Gottingen. WESTERLUND, C. A. 1885: Fauna der in der palaarctischen Region (Europa, Kaukasian…) lebenden Binnenconchylien. V. Fam. Succinidae, Auriculidae, Limnaeidae, Cyclostomidae & Hydrocenidae. pp. 1- 14. Lund. (Hakan Ohlsson).