[Taxacom] Usefulness vs. convenience (Protista)
Richard.Zander at mobot.org
Mon Dec 20 16:48:35 CST 2010
If you try to mix classifications based on patterns of evidence (phylogenetics) and classifications based on theories of evolution of a group (evolutionary systematics) you will always get a mish-mash of apples and oranges. A paraphyletic group is a synchronic (one-dimensional present-day) view of a diachronic (through time) evolutionary process. The phylogenetic view is from well-supported evidence and the evolutionary view is theory. Only the last is science. The first is artificial.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Richard H. Zander
Missouri Botanical Garden, PO Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA
Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/ and http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
Modern Evolutionary Systematics Web site: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/21EvSy.htm
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:12 PM
To: Curtis Clark; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Usefulness vs. convenience (Protista)
>But name me an uncrackable paraphyletic group
basal Bilateria ... where do Acoela and Nematodermata fit in? Xenoturbellida?
>Certainly Reptilia seems well-cracked
then please point me to a fully-worked out published Linnean classification
which is congruent with the phylogeny (i.e., with mammals and birds as
subordinate to the class Reptilia, but still with Linnean ranks) ...
More information about the Taxacom