[Taxacom] classification of Class Rosopsida

Kenneth Kinman kennethkinman at webtv.net
Thu Apr 9 10:43:04 CDT 2009

Dear All, 
       I decided to update my Class Rosopsida
classification (especially since hotmail sort of "chewed up" the
classification I posted last spring). I think it is VERY important to
have such a middle-ground classification, if only to more clearly show
both the commonalities and differences between the two extremes of: (1)
the "traditional" ones, which are usually too split in my opinion, and
don't systematically store sister group information in a way that is
clear and retrievable, and (2) APG, which gets a little too overlumped
in some taxa, and sadly lacks the ranks of Class and Subclass to give
classification a balanced and cohesive structure (which "cladifications"
usually don't, especially the large ones).  I attempt to combine the
best of both (cladistic and eclectic) into a single classification.              
       Most of the changes are in Subclass Rosidae.  I
have added Order Picramniales, and I am now dividing APG's bloated
"super"-Order Malpighiales into just four separate Orders (Violales,
Euphorbiales, Podostemales, and Ochnales), coded as a polytomy (since
their cladistic relationships are still poorly known). These are the
four Orders recognized by Thorne and Reveal, 2007 (in their recent
classification in Botanical Review, Vo. 73, pp. 67-181). They do not use
the name Malpighiales, and APG does not use the name Euphorbiales, so
this thankfully minimizes confusion when those names are used. Frankly,
instead of Malpighiales sensu lato and sensu stricto, I'd now rather see
Malpighiales just disappear from use, as in Thorne and Reveal, 2007,
although I doubt that we will be that lucky anytime soon. I have also
made some other minor changes in coding to reflect updated sister group

Class Rosopsida (eudicots) 

     1 Subclass Ranunculidae%
            1  Ranunculales
            2  Sabiales
            B  Proteales
            3  Trochodendrales
            4  Buxales
            5  Gunnerales 
            6  {{"Core Eudicots"}} (Dilleniidae,

  _1_ Subclass Dilleniidae%%
            1  Saxifragales
            B  Vitales
            C  {{Rosidae}}
            2  Dilleniales
            3  Santalales
            4  Berberidopsidales
            5  Caryophyllales
            B  Polygonales
            C  Nepenthales
            6  Balsaminales
            B  Polemoniales
            C  Primulales
            D  Styracales
            E  Theales
            F  Ericales
            7  Cornales
            8  {{Asteridae}}      

  _a_ Subclass Asteridae (euasterids)              
               1  Aquifoliales 
             B  Asterales
             C  Apiales
             D  Dipsacales
             2  Garryales
             3  Gentianales
             4  Lamiales
             ?  Boraginales
             5  Solanales              

  _b_ Subclass Rosidae (rosids)
             1  Geraniales
             B  Myrtales
             2  Crossosomatales
             B  Picramniales
             C  Sapindales
             D  Huerteales
             E  Malvales
             F  Brassicales
             3  Zygophyllales
             B  Fabales
             C  Rosales
             D  Fagales
             E  Cucurbitales
             4  Celastrales
             5  Oxalidales
             6  Violales
             A  Euphorbiales
             A  Podostemales
             A  Ochnales       

  NOTE: Although I now follow APG in showing Geraniales and Myrtales
as sister groups, I still do not believe that they are part of an
exclusive "malvid" clade. I therefore continue to show malvids as
paraphyletic (two separate, but successive clades) giving rise to the
fabid clade (Zygophyllales to Ochnales). We also differ in the exact
cladistic placement of Dilleniales (not really surprising given how much
it jumps around in different phylogenetic trees).   

More information about the Taxacom mailing list