[Taxacom] Rankless classifications

Paul van Rijckevorsel dipteryx at freeler.nl
Tue Mar 17 23:34:34 CDT 2009

From: "Kenneth Kinman" <kennethkinman at webtv.net>

     And how about the cactus example.  Search for Cactales at NCBI and
you get NO RESULTS.  What percentage of classification end-users know
that Cactaceae has been dumped by strict cladists into Carophyllales.

I would guess that a very high percentage of end-users would look for
Cactaceae in Caryophyllales, which traditionally is the mainstream placement 
(and has been for at least a century?), and also is the choice of Arthur 
Cronquist, whose system was used so pervasively.

Google hits:
Cactaceae+Cactales : 2.220
Cactaceae+Caryophyllales : 75.700

A much more controversial case would be Polygonales, or a level lower:
Chenopodiaceae or Capparidaceae. (Entering Polygonales into the NCBI browser
leads to Caryophyllales, so this is covered. I would guess Cactales is too
unusual to merit the same attention?)

Best wishes,

More information about the Taxacom mailing list