Wyniki wyszukiwania

Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych: phylogenetic nomenclature

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

Artykuł dostępny w postaci pełnego tekstu - kliknij by otworzyć plik

Stability, ranks, and the PhyloCode

100%

Lee M. S. Y., Skinner A.

Acta Palaeontologica Polonica

2007

tom 52

nr 3

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.

Avialan status for Oviraptorosauria

100%

Maryanska T., Osmolska H., Wolsan M.

Acta Palaeontologica Polonica

2002

tom 47

nr 1

Oviraptorosauria is a clade of Cretaceous theropod dinosaurs of uncertain affinities within Maniraptoriformes. All previous phylogenetic analyses placed oviraptorosaurs outside a close relationship to birds (Avialae), recognizing Dromaeosauridae or Troodontidae, or a clade containing these two taxa (Deinonychosauria), as sister taxon to birds. Here we present the results of a phylogenetic analysis using 195 characters scored for four outgroup and 13 maniraptoriform (ingroup) terminal taxa, including new data on oviraptorids. This analysis places Oviraptorosauria within Avialae, in a sister−group relationship with Confuciusornis. Archaeopteryx, Therizinosauria, Dromaeosauridae, and Ornithomimosauria are successively more distant outgroups to the Confuciusornis−oviraptorosaur clade. Avimimus and Caudipteryx are successively more closely related to Oviraptoroidea, which contains the sister taxa Caenagnathidae and Oviraptoridae. Within Oviraptoridae, “Oviraptor” mongoliensis and Oviraptor philoceratops are successively more closely related to the Conchoraptor−Ingenia clade. Oviraptorosaurs are hypothesized to be secondarily flightless. Emended phylogenetic definitions are provided for Oviraptoridae, Caenagnathidae, Oviraptoroidea, Oviraptorosauria, Avialae, Eumaniraptora, Maniraptora, and Maniraptoriformes.

Ograniczanie wyników

2 Acta Palaeontologica Polonica

1 Lee M. S. Y.

1 Maryanska T.

1 Osmolska H.

1 Skinner A.

1 Wolsan M.

1 2007

1 2002

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Stability, ranks, and the PhyloCode

Avialan status for Oviraptorosauria