# Can we do worthwhile science outside academia?

**URL:** <https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/can-we-do-worthwhile-science-outside-academia/70466>\
**Category:** General\
**Created:** [September 20, 2025, 12:22am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/can-we-do-worthwhile-science-outside-academia/70466 "2025-09-20T00:22:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 65

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AdamWargon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/adamwargon/32/44649_2.png) [@AdamWargon](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/AdamWargon)\
**Post date:** [September 22, 2025, 1:29am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/can-we-do-worthwhile-science-outside-academia/70466/65 "2025-09-22T01:29:19Z")

</div>

> [@sedgequeen](#):
>
> I’ve heard again and again from professional botanists that we’d better do the science – **the alpha taxonomy** – because the academics aren’t doing it.

For anyone who needs a refresher, like me, here is my current understanding of the term “alpha taxonomy”:

**Alpha taxonomy** : Finding, describing, and naming new species. Naming the leaves on the tree.

**Beta taxonomy** : Sorting out relationships. Are these two genera really in different families, or should this be the same family? Stuff like that. Redrawing the branches of the tree.

**Gamma taxonomy** : Studying evolution, ecology, and stuff like that. These organisms, which at first glance all look identical, actually occupy different ecological niches, and have had different evolutionary pathways. What evolutionary and ecological factors made the tree grow like that?

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/can-we-do-worthwhile-science-outside-academia/70466)._