| 著者 |
Cowman, Peter F.
Bridge, Tom C.L.
Ainsworth, Tracy D.
Benzoni, Francesca
| en |
Benzoni, Francesca
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
|
Search repository
Bonito, Victor
Budd, Ann
Cabaitan, Patrick
Camp, Emma F.
Chen, Chaolun Allen
| en |
Chen, Chaolun Allen
Biodiversity Research Center, Academia Sinica
|
Search repository
Connolly, Sean R.
Crosbie, Augustine J.
Figueiredo, Joana
Fenner, Douglas
Forsman, Zac
深見, 裕伸
WEKO
35393
e-Rad_Researcher
50402756
| ja |
深見, 裕伸
宮崎大学
|
| ja-Kana |
フカミ, ヒロノブ
|
| en |
Fukami, Hironobu
University of Miyazaki
|
Search repository
Head, Catherine E.I.
Hoeksema, Bert W.
Huang, Danwei
Kitahara, Marcelo V.
Knowlton, Nancy
| en |
Knowlton, Nancy
National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution
|
Search repository
Kuo, Chao Yang
Lin, Mei Fang
Madin, Joshua S.
Mera, Hanaka
Nomura, Keiichi
Oury, Nicolas
| en |
Oury, Nicolas
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
|
Search repository
Quattrini, Andrea M.
| en |
Quattrini, Andrea M.
National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution
|
Search repository
Quigley, Kate M.
Rassmussen, Sage H.
| en |
Rassmussen, Sage H.
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
|
Search repository
Samimi-Namin, Kaveh
Sinniger, Frederic
Suggett, David J.
| en |
Suggett, David J.
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
|
Search repository
Baird, Andrew H.
|
|
内容記述 |
The recent review by Veron et al. (2025) posits that quantitative genomic evidence used to
understand coral evolution should be secondary to species hypotheses derived from expert
opinion based on field experience. The authors argue that morphological “biological entities”
should take precedence over molecular evidence when conflicts arise. This perspective
required the rejection of extensive, independent molecular datasets that have progressively
converged on a robust evolutionary framework for reef corals. Here, we reaffirm how
prioritising subjective visual assessments over quantitative genetic and genomic data is
methodologically unsound and scientifically regressive. We reject the framing of this perspective as “morphology versus molecules”. Rather, it is a fundamental divergence between
two opposing philosophies: a static system anchored in non-reproducible expert judgement,
and an integrative framework where genetic data provide the necessary independent test
of morphological hypotheses. We show how a reliance on “field entities” obscures true
morphological patterns by failing to distinguish between phenotypic plasticity, convergence, and evolutionary divergence. Effective taxonomy requires species hypotheses to be
testable, and to stand or fall on the strength of reproducible evidence. Such a framework
does not replace morphology; it validates it by providing an explicit, testable basis for
evaluating morphological hypotheses. The integration of testable, reproducible molecular
analysis with other lines of evidence including morphology is the benchmark of modern
taxonomy across all Kingdoms of Life. We address the logical inconsistencies in the general
arguments put forward by Veron et al. (2025) and refute their specific rejection of recent
Acropora species-level revision with reproducible data. |
Fulltext (471 KB)
.png)
