LAUSR

The target review of Ravinet et al. (2017) is an upbeat clear and concise summary of the complexities that researchers have become increasingly aware of when attempting to interpret genomic data in a way relevant to understanding speciation. The fact that the review is concise, yet fills many pages, is one measure of that complexity. Another measure is the implications of their suggested road map for future research: the impression is that only a large multidisciplinary team working over multiple grant cycles on a wellstudied organism and combining intensive field work in nature, multigenerational laboratory crosses, wholegenome sequencing of large numbers of individuals across several related taxa, massive computational resources and a panoply of the latest software (and some which does not yet exist) can hope to interpret the ‘genomic landscape’ component of the data they collect on their speciation study system. While this may not be a ‘bleak’ prospect, it is certainly a daunting one. The clarity of the review can only be praised, but the suggested road map implies committing a considerable proportion of the research effort and funding of our scientific community in the direction indicated. Before setting out on this path, it therefore seems only sensible to take a deep breath, think carefully, distance ourselves from the rush for a moment and ask do we have a good overall perspective? What is driving the research push in this direction? Are there lessons to be learned from previous such calls to arms? What can we hope to have learned when we reach our destination? Are there alternatives that have not been considered? Can the problem be divided up to give easier subproblems? Here I will discuss these questions, not in the hope that my own answers will be especially useful, but rather with the conviction that careful thought along these lines can only be good for research as a whole. When I refer to sections, steps, figures or tables, it is those in the review.