Stability, ranks, and the PhyloCode

• Autorzy: Lee M S Y , Skinner A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Current codes of biological nomenclature define taxon names using types and ranks: the type determines the minimal membership of a named taxon, and the rank is supposed to determine its limits. Homo is “the taxon including the type species Homo sapiens that is assigned to the rank of genus”. However, there is no “genus concept” (analogous to a species concept), and thus no way of empirically determining the limits of a particular genus, even in the context of a single agreed phylogeny. The same problems also apply to higher taxa at all other ranks under current codes, leading to great taxonomic instability. All proposed objective criteria for determining membership of taxa at a particular rank (e.g., geological age, genetic divergence) are shown to be problematic. In contrast, the clades named by phylogenetic definitions are objective and stable. Node−based and branchbased definitions are most precise; however, apomorphybased definitions can be ambiguous due to difficulty in defining alternative character states, and optimisation uncertainty. A major benefit of ranks (information about relative nesting of taxa) can be achieved even more efficiently using standardised but rankless suffixes already widely used in phylogenetic taxonomy. Finally, in situations where the phylogeny is poorly known, phylogenetic nomenclature appears to be superior to the Linnean system. Phylogenetic nomenclature does not force one to officially name poorly corroborated groupings, whereas Linnean codes compel users to erect and name genera even when relevant supraspecific relationships are poorly known.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Linnaean nomenclature; stability; phylogenetic nomenclature; phylogenetic definition; current code; rank; name; Linnaean system; type; biological nomenclature

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Palaeontologica Polonica
• Rocznik: 2007
• Tom: 52
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.643-650,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Lee M S Y

• University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia

autor

Skinner A.

Bibliografia

• Avise, J.C. and Johns, G.C. 1999. Proposal for a standardized temporal scheme of biological classification for extant species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96: 7358–7363.
• Benton, M.J. 2000. Stems, nodes, crown clades, and rank−free lists: is Linnaeus dead? Biological Reviews 75: 633–648.
• Bertrand, Y., Pleijel, F., and Rouse, G.W. 2006. Taxonomic surrogacy in biodiversity assessments, and the meaning of Linnaean ranks. Systematics and Biodiversity 4: 149–159.
• Bock, W.J. and Farrand, J. Jr. 1980. The number of species and genera of Recent birds: a contribution to comparative systematics. American Museum Novitates 2703: 1–29.
• Bryant, H.N. 1998. Cladistic information in phylogenetic definitions and designated phylogenetic contexts for the use of taxon names. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 62: 495–503.
• Cannatella, D.C. and de Queiroz, K. 1989. Phylogenetic systematics of the anoles: is a new taxonomy warranted? Systematic Zoology 38: 57–69.
• Cantino, P.D. and de Queiroz, K. 2006. PhyloCode: A Phylogenetic Code of Biological Nomenclature. Revised June 16, 2006. Available at http://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/.
• Cantino, P.D., Olmstead, R.G., and Wagstaff, S.J. 1997. A comparison of phylogenetic nomenclature with the current system: a botanical case study. Systematic Biology 46: 313–331.
• Cela−Conde, C.J. and Ayala, F.J. 2003. Genera of the human lineage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100: 7684–7689.
• de Queiroz, K. 1997. The Linnaean hierarchy and the evolutionization of taxonomy, with emphasis on the problem of nomenclature. Aliso 15: 125–144.
• de Queiroz, K. 1998. The general lineage concept of species, species criteria, and the process of speciation: a conceptual unification and terminological recommendations. In: D.J. Howard and S.H. Berlocher (eds.), Endless Forms: Species and Speciation, 57–75. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• de Queiroz, K. 1999. The general lineage concept of species and the defining properties of the species category. In: R.A. Wilson (ed.), Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays, 49–89. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
• de Queiroz, K. and Cantino, P.D. 2001. Phylogenetic nomenclature and the PhyloCode. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 58: 254–271.
• de Queiroz, K. and Gauthier, J. 1990. Phylogeny as a central principle in taxonomy: phylogenetic definitions of taxon names. Systematic Zoology 39: 307–322.
• de Queiroz, K. and Gauthier, J. 1992. Phylogenetic taxonomy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23: 449–480.
• de Queiroz, K. and Gauthier, J. 1994. Toward a phylogenetic system of biological nomenclature. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 9: 27–31.
• Dominguez, E. and Wheeler, Q.D. 1997. Taxonomic stability is ignorance. Cladistics 13: 367–372.
• Eernisse, D.J. and Peterson, K.J. 2004. The history of animals.In: J. Cracraft and M.J. Donoghue (eds.), Assembling the Tree of Life, 197–208. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Ereshefsky, M. 2001. The Poverty of the Linnaean Hierarchy: A Philosophical Study of Biological Taxonomy. 328 pp. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Ereshefsky, M. 2002. Linnaean ranks: vestiges of a bygone era. Philosophy of Science 69: S305–S315.
• Forey, P.L. 2001. The PhyloCode: description and commentary. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 58: 81–96.
• Gauthier, J. and de Queiroz, K. 2001. Feathered dinosaurs, flying dinosaurs, crown dinosaurs, and the name “Aves”. In: J. Gauthier and L.F. Gall (eds.), New Perspectives on the Origin and Early Evolution of Birds, 7–46. Peabobdy Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven.
• Greuter, W., McNeill, J., Barrie, F.R., Burdet, H.M., Demoulin, V., Filgueiras, T.S., Nicolson, D.H., Silva, P.C., Skog, J.E., Trehane, P., Turland, N.J., and Hawksworth D.L. 2000. International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (St. Loius Code). 474 pp. Koeltz Scientific Books, Königstein.
• Hebert, P.D.N., Cywinska, A., Ball, S.L., and deWaard, J.R. 2003a. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 270: 313–321.
• Hebert, P.D.N., Ratnasingham, S., and deWaard J.R. 2003b. Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences (Supplement) 270: S96–S99.
• Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Systematics. 286 pp. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. [1999 reprint]
• International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 4th Edition. 306 pp. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London.
• Lapage, S.P., Sneath, P.H.A., Lessel, E.F., Skerman, V.B.D., Seeliger, H.P.R., and Clark, W.A. 1992. International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria, 1990 Revision. 232 pp. American Society for Microbiology, Washington D.C.
• Laurin, M. 2005. The advantages of Phylogenetic Nomenclature over Linnean Nomenclature. In: A. Minelli, G. Ortalli, and G. Sanga (eds.), Animal Names, 67–97. Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, Venice.
• Laurin, M. and Cantino, P. 2007. Second meeting of the International Society for Phylogenetic Nomenclature: a report. Zoologica Scripta 36: 109–117.
• Lee, M.S.Y. 1998. Phylogenetic uncertainty, molecular sequences, and the definition of taxon names. Systematic Biology 47: 719–726.
• Lee, M.S.Y. 1999. Stability of higher taxa in phylogenetic nomenclature – some comments on Moore (1998). Zoologica Scripta 28: 361–366.
• Lee, M.S.Y. 2005. Choosing stable reference taxa in phylogenetic nomenclature. Zoologica Scripta 34: 313–318.
• Lidén, M. and Oxelman, B. 1996. Do we need “phylogenetic taxonomy”? Zoologica Scripta 25: 183–185.
• Lidén, M., Oxelman, B., Backlund, A., Andersson, L., Bremer, B., Eriksson, R., Moberg, R., Nordal, I., Persson, K., Thulin, M., and Zimmer, B. 1997. Charlie is our darling. Taxon 46: 735–738.
• Linnaeus, C. 1753. Species Plantarum. 2 volumes: 1–560 and 561–1200 + index (unpaginated). Salvius, Stockholm.
• Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata. 824 pp. Laurentius Salvius, Stockholm.
• Mayr, E. 1950. Taxonomic categories in fossil hominids. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 15: 109–118.
• Mayden, R.L. 1997. A hierarchy of species concepts: the denouement in the saga of the species problem. In: M.F. Claridge, H.A. Dawah, and M.R. Wilson (eds.), Species: The Units of Biodiversity, 381–424. Chapman & Hall, London.
• Monsch, K.A. 2006. The PhyloCode, or alternative nomenclature: why it is not beneficial to palaeontology, either. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 51: 521–524.
• Murphy, W.J., Eizirik, E., O’Brien, S. J., Maden, O., Scalley, M., Douady, C.J., Teeling, E., Ryder, O. A., Stanhope, M.J., de Jong, W. W., and Springer, M.S. 2002. Resolution of the early placental mammal radiation using Bayesian phylogenetics. Science 294: 2348–2351.
• Nixon, K.C. and Carpenter, J.M. 2000. On the other “phylogenetic systematics”. Cladistics 16: 298–318.
• Pleijel, F. and Rouse, G.W. 2003. Ceci n’est pas une pipe: names, clades and phylogenetic nomenclature. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 41: 162–174.
• Rieppel, O. 2006. The Phylocode: a critical discussion of its theoretical foundation. Cladistics 22: 186–197.
• Rowe, T. and Gauthier, J. 1992. Ancestry, paleontology, and the definition of the name Mammalia. Systematic Biology 41: 372–378.
• Schluter, D., Price, T., Mooers, A.Ø., and Ludwig, D. 1997. Likelihood of ancestor states in adaptive radiation. Evolution 51: 1699–1711.
• Sereno, P.C. 1999. Definitions in phylogenetic taxonomy: critique and rationale. Systematic Biology 48: 329–351.
• Sundberg, P. and Pleijel, F. 1994. Phylogenetic classification and the definition of taxon names. Zoologica Scripta 23: 19–25.
• Wyss, A.R. and Meng, J. 1996. Application of phylogenetic taxonomy to poorly resolved crown clades: a stem−modified node−based definition of Rodentia. Systematic Biology 45: 559–568.