[Taxacom] Animalia or Metazoa?

Jim Croft jim.croft at gmail.com
Fri Jul 24 21:08:56 CDT 2009

Which comes back to Paddy's previous post on social 'palatability' of
names and concepts.

There are heaps of people around the world who profess an interest in
'pteridophytes', even 'Pteridophyta'.  Even though based on compelling
evidence, it seems to be phylogenetically quite meaningless, dare I
say 'wrong', to do so.  But, as a concept it is meaningful to them in
their context...


On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Stephen Thorpe<s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
 [reply] that's because the "broader grouping" is diphyletic, and some
> would argue that we don't need "good names" for non-monophyletic
> groupings. There is no reason why the name Animalia can't be used in
> exactly the same sense as Metazoa, so it is no more or less precise ...
> Use of Metazoa merely alienates the general public, who at least have
> some understanding of what an animal is...

Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~

... in pursuit of the meaning of leaf ...

... 'All is leaf' ('Alles ist Blatt') - Goethe

More information about the Taxacom mailing list