[Taxacom] Concladic or concladal? (To clade or not to clade)
kinman at hotmail.com
Wed May 24 12:41:23 CDT 2006
Don and Barry,
I have no idea when I started using clade as a verb. I did a search
for "clading" in the taxacom archives, and I first used it there on 25 Jan.
2004 regarding the possibility of Amborella and Trimenia "clading together".
Seems like forever that I've used the phrase "X clades with Y" or "X and Y
clade together". Did Hennig ever use it as a verb?
I have certainly seen the word contaxic, but not "concladal".
However, since the root comes from the Greek "klados", wouldn't the
preferable spelling perhaps be "concladic"? I'm not sure.
>From: Barry Roth <barry_roth at yahoo.com>
>To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>Subject: [Taxacom] To clade or not to clade
>Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
>I have heard (and used) it in discussions with pals and colleagues --
>generally in situations where the rules of formal syntax and diction were,
>er, relaxed. But it is a good word ("taxon A clades with taxon B in this
>cladistic analysis"), on the model of "taxon C clusters with taxon D in
>this cluster analysis." Cladistic analysis is not a clustering procedure,
>so it is incorrect to use the verb "to cluster" in that context. I also
>like the word (did I coin it, or just dream that I did?) "concladal" --
>meaning, obviously, "belonging to the same clade." It follows the model of
>"congeneric" and "confamilial" but without attribution of any particular
> Barry Roth
>Don.Colless at csiro.au wrote:
>You have, I think, just created linguistic history. I'm not aware of any
>previous use of the verb "to clade". As Dr Johnson might have said "A good
>Div of Entomology, CSIRO,
>GPO Box 1700,
>Email: don.colless at csiro.au
More information about the Taxacom