# Lumper or Splitter? **URL:** \ **Category:** Nature Talk\ **Created:** [June 15, 2026, 11:37am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145 "2026-06-15T11:37:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ASJ-2022](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/asj-2022/32/61320_2.png) [@ASJ-2022](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/ASJ-2022)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 11:37am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/1 "2026-06-15T11:37:28Z")
I tend to want to lump things together, especially when at times, species that have been made separate can easily hybridize and form fertile offspring. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpers\_and\_splitters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpers_and_splitters) ---
**Author:** ![matthew\_connors](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/matthew_connors/32/5817_2.png) [@matthew\_connors](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/matthew_connors)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 11:46am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/2 "2026-06-15T11:46:19Z")
I think I’m a lumper but it’s hard to tell from the inside 😅 ---
**Author:** ![paul\_dennehy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/paul_dennehy/32/1319_2.png) [@paul\_dennehy](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/paul_dennehy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 11:55am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/3 "2026-06-15T11:55:53Z")
I’m a shameless splitter. “Species” is a human construct anyway, the lines are always going to be blurry, so in my opinion if it’s a taxonomic entity we feel the need to talk about, may as well give it a name to make it easier to discuss. ---
**Author:** ![fornaeffe](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/fornaeffe/32/1386_2.png) [@fornaeffe](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/fornaeffe)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 12:11pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/4 "2026-06-15T12:11:04Z")
Usually a lumper 🙂 But after all, I think the decision on splitting or lumping should be made so that the resulting taxonomy is more useful for the uses that will be made of it. As paul\_dennehy noticed, taxa are human constructs. If two populations or evolutionary branches have a noticeable difference and for most uses it is worthwile to have information about that difference in the taxon name, probably it’s a good thing to put them in two different taxa. Although I think the benefit should always be weighted against the burden of associating new names with records using previous taxonomy (and I think this burden is too often overlooked). The think I really hate is when splitting produces loss of information: for example, imagine we’re going to split _Turdus merula_ in two species distinguishable only from genetics. Until now, almost everyone can tell _Turdus merula_ from other _Turdus_ species. After the split, we risk having millions of _Turdus_ sp. observations, just because no one is able to tell the two species, but we lost the information that those millions _Turdus_ sp. observation are NOT _Turdus pilaris, Turdus viscivorus_, etc… Yes, we can create a _Turdus merula_ species group, but are we sure that every observer, application, etc.. will consistently use species groups? ---
**Author:** ![ASJ-2022](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/asj-2022/32/61320_2.png) [@ASJ-2022](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/ASJ-2022)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 1:37pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/5 "2026-06-15T13:37:59Z")
There will be a lot less incorrect identifications if species are lumped, instead of delineations being microscopic details. Just saying. 😁 ---
**Author:** ![jheiser](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/jheiser/32/38935_2.png) [@jheiser](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/jheiser)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 3:11pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/6 "2026-06-15T15:11:39Z")
This is one of my favorite models for understanding human behavior in countless contexts, not just natural history. When you start looking at argument thru this lens, lots of arguments turn out to be based on disagreements over the applicable level of specificity. It is the case that some people tend very much towards one of these over the others. My personal philosophy is to try use the degree of abstraction/specificity that seems to be most useful for the specific circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![reclassifier](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/reclassifier/32/50196_2.png) [@reclassifier](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/reclassifier)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 4:55pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/7 "2026-06-15T16:55:04Z")
I am a special case, I would say: higher taxa I lump (domain\>…\>family; ‘macrotaxa’) lower taxa I generally split (genus\>…\>subspecies ‘microtaxa’). This stems from the fact that I am a creationist and prefer to use a custom baraminological (look it up) system, where macrotaxa do not show evolutionary relationships that I don’t believe exist (case in point, my mammal order Bovimorphia, which includes elephants, horses, cows, hippos, etc.) and microtaxa show speciation and adaptation from two original ancestors (the ancestors and all descendants form a ‘created kind’ or ‘baramin’). It is better to split within a baramin and lump above a baramin. ---
**Author:** ![ASJ-2022](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/asj-2022/32/61320_2.png) [@ASJ-2022](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/ASJ-2022)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 5:22pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/8 "2026-06-15T17:22:33Z")
One reason I’ve heard from people who split is that it allows legal (or other) protection for sub-populations of a formerly single species. This is because instead of having a single species that is more cosmopolitan, you get an entire population that might be localized to some endangered environment. Thus, you’ll be able to claim protection for that population, whereas if it was more cosmopolitan you would not be able to claim it. ---
**Author:** ![vreinkymov](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/vreinkymov/32/58876_2.png) [@vreinkymov](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/vreinkymov)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 5:58pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/9 "2026-06-15T17:58:15Z")
Lumper when IDing and splitter when I want an ID? ---
**Author:** ![ASJ-2022](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/asj-2022/32/61320_2.png) [@ASJ-2022](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/ASJ-2022)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 6:24pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/10 "2026-06-15T18:24:13Z")
> Lumper when IDing and splitter when I want an ID? The optimal condition 😉 ---
**Author:** ![professor\_porcupine](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/professor_porcupine/32/57159_2.png) [@professor\_porcupine](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/professor_porcupine)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 9:03pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/11 "2026-06-15T21:03:05Z")
Great topic, I’m a Lumper for species and a splitter for varieties within a species. I think most species complex should count as 1 species with lots of unique subspecies/varieties. Of course everything is case by case. _Brassica oleracea_, _Brassica rapa_, _Cucurbita pepo_, _Cucumis melo_, _Vigna unguiculata_ & _Vicia lens_ are all examples of single species taxons that contain so much diversity in varities/subspecies. It also just happens that all of these have been domesticated. _Rubus argutus_ complex, _Solanum nigrum_ complex (both american subcomplex & european subcomplex), _Amelanchier arborea/canadensis_ (North American Eastern) complex, _Vicia sativa_ complex, _Malus baccata/asiatica_ complex and many more are examples that should be merged under to simplify this taxonomic mess. Why must we cause ourselves more headaces (don’t we have enough species as it is - especially when you can hybridize so many of them easily & make “new species”? There are few cases where species are merged under 1 genus but should be seperated, for example Section _Eriomalus_ of the _Malus_ genus should be seperated into it’s own genus because it’s phylogenetically distant. Since in the _Maleae_ tribe, inter-generic hybrids are common (The entire tribe could be a single genus) but distinct genus concepts are still useful & many intergeneric hybrids are already documented. > [@paul\_dennehy](#): > > I’m a shameless splitter. “Species” is a human construct anyway, the lines are always going to be blurry Indeed! 💯 Species are absolutely a human made concept/tool but what’s the point of this tool if it’s not useful right? Especially if I can just hybridize everything (Especially wide inter-generic hybrids), you gonna have wayyy too many hybrid species to split up 😂 > [@ASJ-2022](#): > > One reason I’ve heard from people who split is that it allows legal (or other) protection for sub-populations of a formerly single species. Ah that explains why we have so many species 😂, legality is weird. Altho why can’t you have an endangered subspecies/variety? I do also wonder how many extinct heirloom/landrace garden vegetables/flowers are there? They also deserve to be protected especially if they were beloved & appreciated for historical preservation (+ might have useful genetics that were lost with time which could help modern varieties). Same reason why wild tomato subspecies/varieties need protection (or at the very least someone should save their seeds to grow them out & share with as many gardeners/botanists all over the world - this way extinction can be avoided for valuable plants). ---
**Author:** ![vreinkymov](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/vreinkymov/32/58876_2.png) [@vreinkymov](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/vreinkymov)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2026, 12:13am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/12 "2026-06-16T00:13:02Z")
Very much an uphill battle ([source](https://ourworldindata.org/mass-extinctions)): ![w=1350](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/inaturalist/original/3X/5/3/5305029d9c633f96ec6929fca46114ffe0e57ade.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![ltdbjd](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/ltdbjd/32/73115_2.png) [@ltdbjd](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/ltdbjd)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2026, 1:05am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/13 "2026-06-16T01:05:26Z")
I’m splitting the difference and saying I’m a lumptter. I’d love to tell you which side I fall on, but this all went right over my head and I have no idea what any of this stuff means. 🤣Remember, I’m a graduate of a US public school and learned all I know about entomology by reading Dr. Seuss Discovers Bugs. I’ll go sit in the corner with my jacks while the grownups talk about enteromulogee. 😀😀. ---
**Author:** ![ASJ-2022](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/asj-2022/32/61320_2.png) [@ASJ-2022](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/ASJ-2022)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2026, 1:13am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/14 "2026-06-16T01:13:21Z")
> [@professor\_porcupine](#): > > Altho why can’t you have an endangered subspecies/variety? I believe I heard this from a guest in the podcast _In Defense of Plants_ who is involved in the protection of endangered species. Obviously, that’s not the actual reason for splitting, but he did note that legal protections are for endangered “species”, and thus if one can show that a disjunct population in some habitat that is planned for modification (e.g. building new mall, etc) is an entirely new species (and not simply a subpopulation of an otherwise successful and more cosmopolitan species), then it’s more likely that the habitat will be protected. ---
**Author:** ![thebeachcomber](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/thebeachcomber/32/12748_2.png) [@thebeachcomber](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/thebeachcomber)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2026, 1:30am UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/15 "2026-06-16T01:30:40Z")
> [@professor\_porcupine](#): > > Altho why can’t you have an endangered subspecies/variety? you can; Australia has plenty of these, where the entire species may not be threatened, but one of its subspecies is formally listed as endangered ---
**Author:** ![professor\_porcupine](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/professor_porcupine/32/57159_2.png) [@professor\_porcupine](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/professor_porcupine)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2026, 9:21pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/16 "2026-06-17T21:21:58Z")
Wow! That’s crazy… It’s a good thing we have seed vaults incase of such events right 😅. Altho I wonder Entire families extinct? Could they be recreated by crossing all the species within a genus? Some species stem from a lineage complex but other lineages exist, likewise if you cross all of the species together, hidden ancient genetics may reveal themselves like how was tested with Crossing Hazelnuts (_Corylus_) species. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0wEsjo4MTM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0wEsjo4MTM) Litterally Insect Pollinated Flowers were formed on Hazelnut hybrids in the greenhouse, these are unheard of (Hazelnuts are in the birch familiy that is strictly wind pollinated) and yet this exists on an 3 week old hazel. This strongly signals some ancient lineage of insect pollinated _Betulaceae_ that went extinct is reserecting traits. ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/inaturalist/original/3X/1/a/1a75c38fd6223a66cfca9c4a8f2a65c839e683c1.jpeg) ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/inaturalist/original/3X/b/c/bcb97b1de129b2a4b5ef348ed4a3317dee75831e.jpeg) ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/inaturalist/original/3X/6/b/6bccd35a1ed918a4577e4123e67d0b19b5db9844.jpeg) Now if this showed up by simply crossing different lineages of _Corylus_ think what will happen in other plant families as well? What’s even more stranger the Fagales order families are mostly wind pollinated of which Birch family is one of those families, might this suggest even more ancient Fagales lineage resurrfacing that went extinct? Time to recreate extinct lineages (of course they will “never be the same” but why let that ruin the fun 😁). ---
**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/inaturalist/original/2X/7/7831452cf7f0d653ff1ffd34176334b7ef1b6a17.png) [@system](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/system)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2026, 9:22pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/lumper-or-splitter/80145/17 "2026-08-16T21:22:13Z")
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.