Does science drive species naming, or can species naming drive science? A perspective from plant-feeding arthropods

Abstract

How do researchers choose their study species? Some choices are based on ecological or economic importance, some on ease of study, some on tradition - but could the name of a species influence researcher decisions? We asked whether phytophagous arthropod species named after their host plants were more likely to be assayed for host-associated genetic differentiation (or HAD; the evolution of cryptic, genetically isolated host specialists within an apparently more generalist lineage). We chose 30 arthropod species (from a Google Scholar search) for which a HAD hypothesis has been tested. We traced the etymologies of species names in the 30 corresponding genera, and asked whether HAD tests were more frequent among species whose etymologies were based on host-plant names (e.g., Eurosta solidaginis) vs. those with other etymologies (e.g., Eurosta cribata). Species with host-derived etymologies were more likely to feature in studies of HAD than those with other etymologies. We speculate that the etymology of a scientific name can draw a researchers attention to aspects of life-history and thus influence the direction of our scientific gaze.