DNA sequencing is often spoken of as though it is the "final solution" to
questions of taxonomic placement.  I can see that such studies might reveal
high-level relationships (or lack thereof) that might not be expressed in
morphology.  For example, it might reveal that a shell currently classified
as a volute, because it looks like one, is actually a Marginella.  However,
when you get down to decisions at the species or even subspecies level, how
is DNA analysis any more objective than morphologic analysis?  Once you know
the degree of difference between the DNA of two similar forms, doesn't
someone have to make a subjective decision as to whether that degree of
difference warrants specific separation or not?  And aren't we necessarily
going to end up with a camp of taxonomic DNA lumpers and a camp of taxonomic
DNA splitters, just as we have traditionally had with morphological studies?

Paul M.