[Taxacom] resend Kingdom Protista (and Subkingdom Chromista)

Michael A. Ivie mivie at montana.edu
Fri Oct 30 11:22:01 CDT 2015


My question is not in regards to pointing out new phylogenetic info 
published here and there, or the interesting discussions that sometime 
occur about those phylogenies. As far as I can see, Kinman does not do 
phylogenies of novel data.  I am asking about use of the "Kinman 
System," updates of which we are regularly treated to. Classifications 
of all of life are cited all the time, and updated in every new general 
biology textbook, so there is a broad and vibrant market for such 
classifications.  My question is specifically "Does anyone actually use 
and cite the Kinman System of rather eclectic choices?"

Mike

On 10/30/2015 8:19 AM, John Grehan wrote:
> My impression is that the principal difference between Ken and Ruggiero et
> al is that the latter is published. Ken evidently chooses not to tot take
> that path. I have found that Ken's taxonimc and systematic arrangements are
> often an assertion of his personal view, or a 'consensus' or majority view
> that he accepts, but without the corresponding evidence. In the past I have
> found it a bit frustrating at the lack or absence of which
> he considers decisive evidence, but I get the impression that his more
> recent posts focus on new publications and how they might bear on his
> preferences. So I find these contributions sometimes useful, insightful, or
> interesting, regardless of how Ken chooses to apply that information to his
> classification system. I sometimes think that for me the classification as
> an end result is less interesting than how one arrives at that point.
>
> John Grehan
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Dan Lahr <dlahr at ib.usp.br> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> just to bring some data in,
>>
>> a bunch of people are interested in keeping all life classified.  Tom
>> Cavalier-Smith often updates his own classificaitons as well, but large
>> systems are published almost yearly by different people and these are
>> typically highly cited articles - this year saw Ruggiero et al.
>> classification out in PLoS One, a couple years ago the "consensus"
>> classification of Protists backed by the International Society of
>> Protistologists is published periodically (last one was 2012).
>>
>> textbooks, school teachers, and general public are continuously interested
>> in large classifications.  there are many advantages to indexing
>> everything.  on the research end the increasing use of molecular tools to
>> understand ecology of microorganisms depends heavily on classification, and
>> there are currently two very large global initiatives that are funded both
>> by ISoP and the Moore foundation to generate larger, dynamic
>> classifications with molecular referencing- these are UniEuk (still
>> embryonic) and EukRef (http://eukref.org/)
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> dan
>>
>>
>> __________________________________
>> Daniel J. G. Lahr
>> PhD, Assist. Prof.
>> Dept of Zoology, Univ. of Sao Paulo, Brazil
>> Office number: + 55 (11) 3091 0948
>> http://www.ib.usp.br/zoologia/lahr/
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Fred Schueler <bckcdb at istar.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/30/2015 7:52 AM, JF Mate wrote:
>>>
>>>> As long as the topic is taxonomic, the posts civilized and not
>>>> spamming, I donĀ“t see any problem.
>>>>
>>> * here's a related question: does any individual systematist other than
>>> Ken keep an updated classification of all life?
>>>
>>> fred.
>>> ===================================================
>>>
>>> On 29 October 2015 at 17:45, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:
>>>>> Ken Kinman repeatedly references his own classification, called the
>>>>> Kinman
>>>>> System, and posts modifications of it.  Does anyone actually use this?
>>>>> In
>>>>> Web of Science, I find a 1994 reference, and a single citation of it in
>>>>> 20
>>>>> years.  Am I missing something?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/28/2015 8:46 PM, Kenneth Kinman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hotmail or Taxacom continues to make a mess posting my
>> classifications,
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> I'll try just one more time.  This is my final attempt.           Hi
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>> Below I decided to show Kingdom Protista divided into Subkingdoms
>>>>>> Protozoa
>>>>>> and Chromista. I could also combine Phylum Chlorophyta and Kingdom
>>>>>> Metaphyta
>>>>>> into a Kingdom Viridiplantae if that consensus would be preferable
>> (but
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> is a separate issue to be decided later). I am all for a consensus
>>>>>> classification, but I just don't think Ruggiero et al. was quite
>> enough
>>>>>> of a
>>>>>> consensus for the protists (and the Kingdoms that evolved from them).
>>>>>> ---------------Ken P.S. It should be noted that the current version of
>>>>>> Chromista has become much broader than when Chromista was first
>> proposed
>>>>>> decades ago. So much so that I am somewhat reluctant to still call
>> this
>>>>>> Subkingdom Chromista (especially with the recent addition of
>> Rhizaria).
>>>>>> However, in view of Ruggiero et al.'s continued recognition of a full
>>>>>> Kingdom Chromista, they left me with little choice if a true consensus
>>>>>> is to
>>>>>> be achieved. Anyway, just as there are probably better ways to
>> subdivide
>>>>>> Superkingdom Prokaryota (into Negibacteria and Posibacteria, rather
>> than
>>>>>> Eubacteria and Archaebacteria), there are also probably better ways to
>>>>>> subdivide Kingdom Protista. In each case, I guess I'll just have to
>> try
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> modify the consensus in two steps instead of one. Hopefully I'll live
>>>>>> long
>>>>>> enough to see that happen.       -----------------Ken Kinman
>>>>>> KINGDOM PROTISTA SUBKINGDOM PROTOZOA% 1   Euglenozoa  2A  Percolozoa
>> B
>>>>>> Loukozoa  C   Metamonada  3A  Amoebozoa  B  Breviatea  C  Apusozoa  D
>>>>>> Choanozoa%%             1A Cristidiscoidea             1B {{Fungi}}
>>>>>> 2 Ichthyosporea             ? Corallochytrea            3 Filasterea
>>>>>> 4 Choanoflagellatea             5 {{Animalia}}    _a_ {{Kingdom FUNGI
>>>>>> a.k.a.
>>>>>> EUMYCOTA}} (true fungi)   _b_ {{Kingdom ANIMALIA, a.k.a. METAZOA}}  4A
>>>>>> Glaucophyta  B  Rhodophyta  C  Chlorophyta%  _a_  {{Kingdom METAPHYTA,
>>>>>> a.k.a
>>>>>> PLANTAE sensu stricto}} (embryophytes)  5  {{Subkingdom Chromista}}
>>>>>> SUBKINGDOM CHROMISTA   1A  Cryptophyta   1B  Haptophyta   2
>> Rhizaria  3
>>>>>> Heterokonta (stramenopiles)  4  Ciliophora  5  Dinozoa (or
>> Dinophyta)  6
>>>>>> Sporozoa
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>>>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>>>>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
>>>>>
>>>>> US Post Office Address:
>>>>> Montana Entomology Collection
>>>>> Marsh Labs, Room 50
>>>>> 1911 West Lincoln Street
>>>>> Montana State University
>>>>> Bozeman, MT 59717
>>>>> USA
>>>>>
>>>>> UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
>>>>> Montana Entomology Collection
>>>>> Marsh Labs, Room 50
>>>>> 1911 West Lincoln Street
>>>>> Montana State University
>>>>> Bozeman, MT 59718
>>>>> USA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> (406) 994-4610 (voice)
>>>>> (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
>>>>> mivie at montana.edu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>>>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>>
>>>> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>            Frederick W. Schueler & Aleta Karstad
>>> Daily Paintings - http://karstaddailypaintings.blogspot.com/
>>> Vulnerable Watersheds - http://vulnerablewaters.blogspot.ca/
>>> Mudpuppy Night in Oxford Mills - http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm
>>>      RR#2 Bishops Mills, Ontario, Canada K0G 1T0
>>>     on the Smiths Falls Limestone Plain 44* 52'N 75* 42'W
>>>      (613)258-3107 <bckcdb at istar.ca> http://pinicola.ca/
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.

-- 
__________________________________________________

Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.

US Post Office Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA

UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59718
USA


(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu




More information about the Taxacom mailing list