[Taxacom] Clade age

Richard Pyle deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Fri Nov 18 11:23:02 CST 2011


Yes.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Zander
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 6:56 AM
> To: Kenneth Kinman; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Clade age
>
> In my opinion, Linnaean classification models nothing particular in nature
and
> so is equally disadvantageous to classical and phylogenetic systematics.
What
> it does do, however, is provide a theoretically neutral way to show
> differences (lists of taxa at the same rank) and similarities (groups of
taxa
> under a higher rank). This is I think why it works so well for dealing
with all
> taxon concepts. Shall we keep it?
>
>
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * *
> 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
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Kenneth
> Kinman
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:18 PM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Clade age
>
> Hi Don,
>        Agreed.  And the worst case in biology of definitions run amuck is
the
> PhyloCode.  The irony is that continued disagreement among PhyloCodists
> over differing definitions has actually impeded the implementation of
> PhyloCode (last I saw, I think it was version 4b).  I guess we can always
hope
> that the infighting continues and that the
> delay in implementation might continue indefinitely.
>               ----------Ken
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Don.Colless wrote:
>        I hate to have to agree with John, but happily I can join him in
agreeing
> (basically) with Curtis. The logical notion of a definition requires a set
of
> invariant, necessary, and sufficient conditions - which just doesn't apply
in
> matters empirical. We use (as Curtis
> stresses) DIAGNOSES: sets of conditions of which none may be necessary
> but a "substantial" number will usually be sufficient. We simply have to
> agree, as we usually do, on how many is substantial.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here



This message is only intended for the addressee named above.  Its contents may be privileged or otherwise protected.  Any unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this message or its contents is prohibited.  If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply mail or by collect telephone call.  Any personal opinions expressed in this message do not necessarily represent the views of the Bishop Museum.




More information about the Taxacom mailing list