[Taxacom] Order Campanulales (worth maintaining?)

Jim Croft jim.croft at gmail.com
Wed Feb 16 04:32:23 CST 2011

Preference? So, Angiosperm phylogeny is a popularity contest now?

What ever happened to that quaint archaic notion of evidence as a
trigger for change?


On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Kenneth Kinman <kennethkinman at webtv.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>      Since I haven't updated my angiosperm classification in almost 2
> years, I was looking at some possible changes, especially some minor
> coding changes.
>       However, in the process, I also began to wonder about whether to
> continue separating Order Campanulales from Order Asterales (which were
> merged in APG II).  Although Order Campanulales may now only include two
> families (Campanulaceae and Rousseaceae), it is still rather speciose.
>     Anyway, I have no strong inclination one way or the other in this
> case.  So I wonder if any taxacomers have any preferences one way or the
> other?  Lump Order Campanulales into Asterales, or keep them as separate
> sister Orders?
>            --------Cheers,
>                            Ken Kinman
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point
of doubtful sanity.'
 - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963)

Please send URLs, not attachments:

More information about the Taxacom mailing list