Boolean logic and character state identity: Pitfalls of character coding in metazoan cladistics

Contributions to Zoology

Volumn 71, Issue 1-3, 2002, Pages 67-91

  Jenner, Ronald A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Absence presence coding; Boolean logic; Character coding; Character state identity; Metazoa; Metazoan cladistics; Non additive binary coding

Indexed keywords

METAZOA;

EID: 0036980140     PISSN: 00678546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/18759866-0710103006     Document Type: Review

References (114)

1. Anderson DT. 1973. Embryology and phylogeny in annelids and arthropods. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
2. Bartolomaeus T, Ax P. 1992. Protonephridia and metanephridia - their relation within the Bilateria. Zeitschr. zool. Syst. Evolut.-forsch. 30: 21-45.
3. Brower AVZ, Schawaroch V. 1996. Three steps of homology assessment. Cladistics 12: 265-272.
4. Budelmann BU, Schipp R, Boletzky S von. 1997. Cephalopoda. In: Harrison FW, Kohn AJ, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 6A. Mollusca II. New York: Wiley-Liss, 119-414.
5. Carine, MA, Scotland RW. 1999. Taxic and transformational homology: different ways of seeing. Cladistics 15: 121-129.
6. Clément P, Wurdak E. 1991. Rotifera. In: Harrison FW, Ruppert EE, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 4. Aschelminthes. New York: Wiley-Liss, 219-297.
7. Davidson EH. 1991. Spatial mechanisms of gene regulation in metazoan embryos. Development 113: 1-26.
8. Davidson EH. 2001. Genomic regulatory systems. Development and evolution. San Diego, Academic Press.
9. Davidson EH, Cameron RA, Ransick A. 1998. Specification of cell fate in the sea urchin embryo: summary and some proposed mechanisms. Development 125: 3269-3290.
10. Dewel RA, Nelson DR, Dewel WC. 1993. Tardigrada. In: Harrison FW, Rice ME, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 12. Onychophora, Chilopoda, and lesser Protostomata. New York: Wiley-Liss, 143-183.
11. Donoghue PCJ, Forey PL, Aldridge RJ. 2000. Conodont affinity and chordate phylogeny. Biol. Rev. 75: 191-251.
12. Eernisse DJ, Albert JS, Anderson FE. 1992. Annelida and arthropoda are not sister taxa: a phylogenetic analysis of spiralian metazoan morphology. Syst. Biol. 41: 305-330.
13. Eldredge N. 1979. Alternative approaches to evolutionary theory. Bull. Carnegie Mus. Nat. Hist. 12: 7-19.
14. Emerson SB, Hastings PA. 1998. Morphological correlations in evolution: consequences for phylogenetic analysis. Quart. Rev. Biol. 73: 141-162.
15. Farris JS. 1988. Hennig86. Port Jefferson, New York.
16. Farris JS, Kluge AG, Laet JE de. 2001. Taxic revisions. Cladistics 17: 79-103.
17. Forey PL, Kitching IJ. 2000. Experiments in coding multistate characters. In: Scotland R, Pennington RT, eds. Homology and systematics. Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis. London: Taylor & Francis, 54-80.
18. Fryer G. 1999. A comment on a recent phylogenetic analysis of certain orders of the branchiopod Crustacea. Crustaceana 72: 1039-1049.
19. Fryer G. 2001. The elucidation of branchiopod phylogeny. Crustaceana 74: 105-114.
20. Funch P, Kristensen RM. 1997. Cycliophora. In: Harrison FW, Woollacott RM, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Lophophorates, Entoprocta, and Cycliophora. New York: Wiley-Liss, 409-474.
21. Giribet G, Distel DL, Polz M, Sterrer W, Wheeler WC. 2000. Triploblastic relationships with emphasis on the acoelomates and the position of Gnathostomulida, Cycliophora, Plathelminthes, and Chaetognatha: a combined approach of 18S rDNA sequences and morphology. Syst. Biol. 49: 539-562.
22. Giribet G, Edgecombe GD, Wheeler WC. 2001. Arthropod phylogeny based on eight molecular loci and morphology. Nature 413: 157-161.
23. Gould SJ. 2000. Deconstructing the "science wars" by reconstructing an old mold. Science 287: 253-261.
24. Grande L, Bemis WE. 1998. A comprehensive phylogenetic study of amiid fishes (Amiidae) based on comparative skeletal anatomy. An empirical search for interconnected patterns of natural history. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Memoir 4.
25. Haszprunar G. 1996a. The Mollusca: coelomate turbellarians or mesenchymate annelids? In: Taylor JD, ed. Origin and evolutionary radiation of the Mollusca. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-28.
26. Haszprunar G. 1996b. The molluscan rhogocyte (pore-cell, Blasenzelle, cellule nucale), and its significance for ideas on nephridial evolution. J. Moll. Stud. 62: 185-211.
27. Hawkins JA. 2000. A survey of primary homology assessment: different botanists peceive and define characters in different ways. In: Scotland R, Pennington RT, eds. Homology and systematics. Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis. London: Taylor & Francis, 22-53.
28. Hawkins JA, Hughes CE, Scotland RW. 1997. Primary homology assessment, characters and character states. Cladistics 13: 275-283.
29. Henry JQ, Martindale MQ, Boyer BC. 2000. The unique developmental program of the acoel flatworm, Neochildia fusca. Dev. Biol. 220: 285-295.
30. Jeffery WR, Swalla BJ. 1997. Tunicates. In: Gilbert SF, Raunio AM, eds. Embryology. Constructing the organism. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, 331-364.
31. Jenner RA. 1999. Metazoan phylogeny as a tool in evolutionary biology: current problems and discrepancies in application. Belg. J. Zool. 129: 245-262.
32. Jenner RA. 2000. Evolution of animal body plans: the role of metazoan phylogeny at the interface between pattern and process. Evol. Devel. 2: 208-221.
33. Jenner RA. 2001. Bilaterian phylogeny and uncritical recycling of morphological data sets. Syst. Biol. 50: 730-742.
34. Jenner RA. 2002. Macroevolution of animal body plans. Evaluating alternative hypotheses. Ph.D. thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
35. Jenner RA. submitted. Unleashing the force of cladistics? Metazoan phylogenetics and hypothesis testing. Integ. Comp. Biol. (formerly Amer. Zool.)
36. Jenner RA, Schram FR. 1999. The grand game of metazoan phylogeny: rules and strategies. Biol. Rev. 74: 121-142.
37. Kitching IJ, Forey PL, Humphries CJ, Williams DM. 1998. Cladistics. The theory and practice of parsimony analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. Kluge AG. 2001. Parsimony with and without scientific justification. Cladistics 17: 199-210.
39. Kluge AG, Farris JS. 1999. Taxic homology = overall similarity. Cladistics 15: 205-212.
40. Kristensen RM, Higgins RP. 1991. Kinorhyncha.: Harrison FW, Ruppert EE, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 4. Aschelminthes. New York: Wiley-Liss, 377-404.
41. Lacalli TC. 1994. Apical organs, epithelial domains, and the origin of the chordate central nervous system. Amer. Zool. 34: 533-541.
42. Lacalli TC. 1996. Landmarks and subdomains in the larval brain of Branchiostoma: vertebrate homologs and invertebrate antecedents. Israel J. Zool. 42: 131-146.
43. Lammert V. 1991. Gnathostomulida. In: Harrison FW, Ruppert EE, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 4. Aschelminthes. New York: Wiley-Liss, 19-39.
44. Lee MSY. 1995. Historical burden in systematics and the interrelationships of 'parareptiles.' Biol. Rev. 70: 459-547.
45. Lee D-C, Bryant HN. 1999. A reconsideration of the coding of inapplicable characters. Cladistics 15: 373-378.
46. Lemburg, C. 1998. Electron microscopical localization of chitin in the cuticle of Halicryptus spinulosus and Priapulus caudatus (Priapulida) using gold-labelled wheat germ agglutinin: phylogenetic implications for the evolution of the cuticle within the Nemathelminthes. Zoomorphology 118: 137-158.
47. Lüter C. 2000. The origin of the coelom in Brachiopoda and its phylogenetic significance. Zoomorphology 120: 15-28.
48. Maddison WP. 1993. Missing data versus missing characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42: 576-580.
49. Maddison DR, Maddison, WP. 2001. MacClade 4. Version 4.02. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc.
50. Marques AC. 1996. A critical analysis of a cladistic study of the genus Eudendrium (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa), with some comments on the family Eudendriidae. J. Comp. Biol. 1: 141-162.
51. Martin VJ. 1997. Cnidarians, the jellyfish and hydras. In: Gilbert SF, Raunio AM, eds. Embryology. Constructing the organism.. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, 57-86.
52. Martindale MQ, Henry JQ. 1998. The development of radial and biradial symmetry: the evolution of bilaterality. Amer. Zool. 38: 672-684.
53. Mayr E. 1982. The growth of biological thought. Massachussetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
54. Mayr E. 1995. Systems of ordering data. Biol. Phil. 10: 419-434.
55. Mellon, D. 1992. Connective tissue and supporting structures. In: Harrison FW, Humes AG, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 10. Decapod Crustacea. New York: Wiley-Liss, 77-116.
56. Mukai H, Terakado K, Reed CG. 1997. Bryozoa. In: Harrison FW, Woollacott RM, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Lophophorates, Entoprocta, and Cycliophora. New York: Wiley-Liss, 45-206.
57. Neuhaus B, Kristensen RM, Lemburg C. 1996. Ultrastructure of the cuticle of the Nemathelminthes and electron microscopical localization of chitin. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Zoologischen Gesellschaft 89: 221.
58. Neuhaus B, Kristensen RM, Peters W. 1997. Ultrastructure of the cuticle of Loricifera and demonstration of chitin using gold-labelled wheat germ agglutinin. Acta Zool. 78: 215-225.
59. Nielsen C. 1998. Morphological approaches to phylogeny. Amer. Zool. 38: 942-952.
60. Nielsen C. 2001. Animal evolution. Interrelationships of the living phyla. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
61. Nielsen C, Scharff N, Eibye-Jacobsen D. 1996. Cladistic analyses of the animal kingdom. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 57: 385-410.
62. Olesen J. 2000. An updated phylogeny of the Conchostraca - Cladocera clade (Branchiopoda, Diplostraca). Crustaceana 73: 869-886.
63. Patterson C. 1982. Morphological characters and homology. In: Joysey KA, Friday AE, eds. Problems of phylogenetic reconstruction. London: Academic Press, 21-74.
64. Patterson C, Johnson GD. 1997. The data, the matrix, and the message: comments on Begle's :Relationships of the osmeroid fishes." Syst. Biol. 46: 358-365.
65. Peterson KJ, Eernisse DJ. 2001. Animal phylogeny and the ancestry of bilaterians: inferences from morphology and 18S rDNA gene sequences. Evol. Devel. 3: 170-205.
66. Pimentel RA, Riggins R. 1987. The nature of cladistic data. Cladistics 3: 201-209.
67. dePinna, MCC. 1991. Concepts and tests of homology in the cladistic paradigm. Cladistics 7: 367-394.
68. Pleijel F. 1995. On character coding for phylogeny reconstruction. Cladistics 11: 309-315.
69. Poe S, Wiens JJ. 2000. Character selection and the methodology of morphological phylogenetics. In: Wiens JJ, ed. Phylogenetic analysis of morphological data. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 20-36.
70. Pogue MG, Mickevich MF. 1990. Character definitions and character state delineations: the bête noire of phylogenetic inference. Cladistics 6: 319-361.
71. Reed CG. 1991. Bryozoa. In: Giese AC, Pearse JS, Pearse VB, eds. Reproduction of marine invertebrates. Vol. VI. Echinoderms and lophophorates. California: The Boxwood Press, 85-245.
72. Rieger RM, Tyler S, Smith III JPS, Rieger GE. 1991. Platyhelminthes: Turbellaria. In: Harrison FW, Bogitsh, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 3. Platyhelminthes and Nemertinea. New York: Wiley-Liss, 7-140.
73. Rieppel O, Reisz RR. 1999. The origin and early evolution of turtles. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 30: 1-22.
74. Rieppel O, Zaher H. 2000. The braincases of mosasaurs and Varanus, and the relationships of snakes. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 129: 489-514.
75. Rieppel O, Kearney M. 2002. Similarity. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 75: 59-82.
76. Rohde K. 1996. Robust phylogenies and adaptive radiations: a critical examination of methods used to identify key innovations. Am. Nat. 148: 481-500.
77. Rouse GW. 2001. A cladistic analysis of Siboglinidae Caullery, 1914 (Polychaeta, Annelida): formerly the phyla Pogonophora and Vestimentifera. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 132: 55-80.
78. Rouse GW, Fauchald K. 1995. The articulation of annelids. Zool. Scr. 24: 269-301.
79. Rouse GW, Fauchald K. 1997. Cladistics and polychaetes. Zool. Scr. 26: 139-204.
80. Ruppert EE. 1991. Gastrotricha. In: Harrison FW, Ruppert EE, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 4. Aschelminthes. New York: Wiley-Liss, 41-109.
81. Ruppert EE. 1994. Evolutionary origin of the vertebrate nephron. Amer. Zool. 34: 542-553.
82. Ruppert EE, Smith PR. 1988. The functional organization of filtration nephridia. Biol. Rev. 63: 231-258.
83. Schmidt-Rhaesa A, Bartolomaeus T, Lemburg C, Ehlers U, Garey JR. 1998. The position of the Arthropoda in the phylogenetic system. J. Morph. 238: 263-285.
84. Scholtz, G. 1997. Cleavage, germ band formation and head segmentation: the groundpattern of the Euarthropoda. In: Fortey RA, Thomas RH, eds. Arthropod relationships. London: Chapman & Hall, The Systematics Association Special Volume Series 55, 317-332.
85. Schram FR. 1991. Cladistic analysis of metazoan phyla and the placement of fossil problematica. In: Simonetta A, Conway Morris S, eds. The early evolution of Metazoa and the significance of problematic taxa. 35-46.
86. Schram FR, Jenner RA. 2001. The origin of Hexapoda: a crustacean perspective. In: Deuve T, ed. Origin of Hexapoda. Ann. Soc. entomologique de France 37: 243-264.
87. Scotland RW. 2000a. Taxic homology and three-taxon statement analysis. Syst. Biol. 49: 480-500.
88. Scotland RW. 2000b. Homology, coding and three-taxon statement analysis. In: Scotland R, Pennington RT. eds. Homology and systematics. Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis. London: Taylor & Francis, 145-182.
89. Scotland R, Pennington RT. 2000. Homology and systematics. Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis. London: Taylor & Francis.
90. Shinn GL. 1997. Chaetognatha. In: Harrison FW, Ruppert EE, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 15. Hemichordata, Chaelognatha, and the invertebrate chordates. New York: Wiley-Liss, 103-220.
91. Shultz JW, Regier JC. 2000. Phylogenetic analysis of arthropods using two nuclear protein-encoding genes support a crustacean + hexapod clade. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 267: 1011-1019.
92. Siewing R. 1979. Homology of cleavage types. Fortschr. Zool. Syst. Evolut. 1: 7-18.
93. Smith PR. 1992. Polychaeta: excretory system. In: Harrison FW, Gardiner SL, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 7. Annelida. New York: Wiley-Liss, 71-108.
94. Smith PR, Ruppert EE. 1988. Nephridia. In: Westheide W, Hermans CO, eds. Microfauna Marina. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag, 231-262.
95. Sorensen MV, Funch P, Willerslev E, Hansen AJ, Olesen J. 2000. On the phylogeny of the Metazoa in the light of Cycliophora and Micrognathozoa. Zool. Anz. 239: 297-318.
96. Strong EE, Lipscomb D. 1999. Character coding and inapplicable data. Cladistics 15: 363-371.
97. Sweet HC, Hodor PG, Ettensohn CA. 1999. The role of micromere signalling in Notch activation and mesoderm specification during sea urchin embryogenesis. Development 126: 5255-5265.
98. Swofford DL. 2002. PAUP. Sunderland, Sinauer Associates, Include Publishing.
99. Turbeville JM. 1991. Nemertinea. In: Harrison FW, Bogitsh BJ, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 3. Platyhelminthes and Nemertinea. New York: Wiley-Liss, 285-328.
100. Turbeville JM, Ruppert EE. 1985. Comparative ultrastucture and the evolution of nemertines. Am. Zool. 25: 53-71.
101. Valentine JW. 1997. Cleavage patterns and the topology of the metazoan tree of life. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 94: 8001-8005.
102. Wägele JW, Erikson E, Lockhart P, Misof B. 1999. The Ecdysozoa: artifact or monophylum? J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 37: 211-223.
103. Wägele JW, Misof B. 2001. On quality of evidence in phylogeny reconstruction: a reply to Zrzavý's defence of the 'Ecdysozoa' hypothesis. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Research 39: 165-176.
104. Waggoner BM. 1996. Phylogenetic hypotheses of the relationships of arthropods to precambrian and cambrian problematic fossil taxa. Syst. Biol. 45: 190-222.
105. Wallace RL, Ricci C. Melone G. 1996. A cladistic analysis of pseudocoelomate (aschelminth) morphology. Invert. Biol. 115: 104-112.
106. Watling L. 1999. Toward understanding the relationships of the peracaridan orders: the necessity of determining exact homologies. In: Schram FR, Vaupel Klein JC von, eds. Crustaceans and the biodiversity crisis. Leiden: Brill, 73-89.
107. Wilkinson M. 1995. A comparison of two methods of character construction. Cladistics 11: 297-308.
108. Williams DM, Siebert DJ. 2000. Characters, homology and three-item analysis. In: Scotland R, Pennington RT, eds. Homology and systematics. Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis. London: Taylor & Francis, 183-208.
109. Wilson EO. 1998. Consilience. The unity of knowledge. London, Abacus.
110. Wright KA. 1991. Nematoda. In: Harrison FW, Ruppert EE, eds. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates. Vol. 4. Aschelminthes. New York: Wiley-Liss, 111-195.
111. Zimmer RL. 1997. Phoronids, brachiopods, and bryozoans, the lophophorates. In: Gilbert SF, Raunio AM, eds. Embryology. Constructing the organism. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, 279-305.
112. Zrzavý J. 2001. Ecdysozoa versus Articulata: clades, artifacts, prejudices. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Research 39: 159-163.
113. Zrzavý J, Mihulka, S, Kepka P, Bezdek A, Tietz D. 1998. Phylogeny of the Metazoa based on morphological and 18S ribosomal DNA evidence. Cladistics 14: 249-285.
114. Zrzavý J, Hypsa V, Tietz DF. 2001. Myzostomida are not annelids. Molecular and morphological support for a clade of animals with anterior sperm flagella. Cladistics 17: 170-198.