Platnick's view of Phylocode
thomas.pape at NRM.SE
Tue Mar 12 08:31:29 CST 2002
Ken Kinman wrote:
"..... The point is that my classifications are basically encoded
with an occasional paraphyletic break (at major gaps) to reflect major
evolutionary events (the amphibian transition to land, the transition to the
amniotic egg, the transition of fuzzy dinosaurs into feathered birds)..."
But why stress an evolutionary novelty, however 'major' it may seem, by
lumping groups NOT having this feature into a paraphyletic non-group?
Does the advent of the amniotes in any way justify that non-amniote
'amphibians' should not have their correct phylogeny mapped in the
Why cannot a 'minor gap' be just as scientifically exciting as a 'major
How does a paraphyletic group add to the information content of a
classification apart from visualising our lack of knowledge?
Should classifications be scientifically coherent in the sense of being
logically consistent with the reality of individual taxa (or clades) open to
More information about the Taxacom