[Taxacom] Addendum to my last post on Kingdom Protista
kennethkinman at webtv.net
Mon Jul 27 22:31:29 CDT 2009
Thanks for the link to your Wikispecies article on
Eukaryota. I was totally unaware of Cavalier-Smith's most recent paper.
It looks like he is contesting some of the molecular data on the sister
group of Phylum Rhizaria (due to long-branch attraction). Makes me very
glad that I decided to only to put Rhizaria as sister group to
chromalveolates (rather than within them), as my latest coding showed
several days ago (see below).
However, now I have to decide whether to leave
Rhizaria there (basal within an "SAR" clade), or make it a sister group
to the Excavata clade (as Cavalier-Smith now advocates), or with go with
an intermediate phylogeny where Rhizaria would be sister group to the
photokaryotes (a placement which I don't think anyone has suggested
before, but might actually turn out to be the best solution to this
quandry). However, for me this is just a coding problem. The even
bigger puzzle still seems to be whether Apusozoa is an independent
phylum, or if it fits within one of the phyla which I already recognize.
Cavalier-Smith seems to be as puzzled by apusozoans as everyone else.
1 Choanozoa%% (= Mesomycetozoa)
3 Metamonada (incl. Parabasalia)
B Loukozoa (jakobids and allies)
C Heterokonta (stramenopiles)
8 Dinozoa (or Dinophyta)
NOTES: Clades 6-9 make up the Chromalveolate clade. Clades 5-9 make up
the recently discovered "SAR" clade (if it actually is a clade). Clades
4-9 is the photokaryote clade (sensu lato). And of course, clades 3-9
still forms the bikont clade.
More information about the Taxacom