Complex data produce better characters

Systematic Biology

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 1-17

  Kirchoff, B K ^a   Richter, S J ^a   Remington, D L ^a   Wisniewski, E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

Analytic processing; Banskia; Character; Character state; Complexity; Configural processing; Dubautia; Holistic processing; Phylogenetic analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASTERACEAE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GENETICS; HISTOLOGY; HYBRIDIZATION; METHODOLOGY; PHYLOGENY; PLANT; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS;

ASTERACEAE; CLASSIFICATION; HYBRIDIZATION, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; PLANT COMPONENTS, AERIAL; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

ASTERACEAE; DUBAUTIA; DUBAUTIA CILIOLATA;

EID: 1642401476     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10635150490424376     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Adams, E. N. III. 1972. Consensus techniques and the comparison of taxonomic trees. Syst. Zool. 21:390-397.
2. Anderson, E. 1951. Concordant versus discordant variation in relation to introgression. Evolution 5:133-141.
3. Anderson, E., and A. Gage. 1952. Introgressive hybridization in Phlox bifida. Am. J. Bot. 39:399-404.
4. Anderson, E., and E. D. Rudolph. 1956. An analysis of variation in a variable population of Cladonia. Evolution 10:147-156.
5. Baldwin, B.G., and M.J. Sanderson. 1998. Age and rate of diversification of the Hawaiian silversword alliance (Compositae). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95:9402-9406.
6. Bortoft, H. 1996. The Wholeness of nature. Lindisfarne Press, Hudson, NY.
7. Brooks, L. R. 1978. Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances. Pages 169-211 in Cognition and categorization (E. Rosch and B. B. Lloyd, eds.). Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
8. Brower, A. V. Z., and V. Schawaroch. 1996. Three steps of homology assessment. Cladistics 12:265-272.
9. Campbell, J. A., and D. R. Frost. 1993. Anguid lizards of the genus Abronia: Revisionary notes, descriptions of four new species, phylogenetic analysis, and key. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 216:1-121.
10. Carr, G. D. 1985. Monograph of the Hawaiian Madiinae (Asteraceae): Argyroxiphium, Dubautia, and Wilkesia. Allertonia 4:1-123.
11. Colless, D. 1985. On "character" and related terms. Syst. Zool. 34:229-233.
12. Davis, P. H., and V. Heywood. 1973. Principles of angiosperm taxonomy. Robert Krieger, Huntington, New York.
13. de Pinna, M. C. C. 1991. Concepts and tests of homology in the cladistic paradigm. Cladistics 7:367-394.
14. Diamond, R., and S. Carey. 1986. Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 115:107-117.
15. Donoghue, M. J., and M. J. Sanderson. 1994. Complexity and homology in plants. Pages 394-421 in Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology (B. K. Hall, ed.). Academic Press, San Diego.
16. Farah, M. J., J. N. Tanaka, and M. Drain. 1995. What causes the face inversion effect? J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 21:628-634.
17. Farris, J. S. 1989. The retention index and rescaled consistency index. Cladistics 5:417-419.
18. Fristrup, K. 1992. Character: Current usages. Pages 45-51 in Keywords in evolutionary biology (E. F. Keller and E. A. Lloyd, eds.). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
19. Fristrup, K. 2001. A history of character concept in evolutionary biology. Pages 13-35 in The character concept in evolutionary biology (G. Wagner, ed). Academic Press, San Diego.
20. Gauthier, I., and M. J. Tarr. 2002. Unraveling mechanisms for expert object recognition: Bridging brain activity and behavior. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 28:431-436.
21. Gauthier, I., P. Williams, M. J. Tarr, and J. Tanaka. 1998. Training "greeble" experts: A framework for studying expert object recognition processes. Vision Res. 38:2401-2428.
22. Gift, N., and P. F. Stevens, 1997. Vagaries in the delimitation of character states in quantitative variation - an experimental study. Syst. Biol. 46:112-125.
23. Goldstone, R. L. 2000. Unitization during category learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 26:86-112.
24. Good, D. A. 1988. Phylogenetic relationships among gerrhonotine lizards. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 121:1-138.
25. Hall, B. K. 1994. Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology. Academic Press, San Diego.
26. Hall, B. K. 1999. Homology. John Wiley, Chichester.
27. Hawkins, J. A. 2000. A survey of primary homology assessment: Different botanists perceive and define characters in different ways. Pages 22-53 in Homology and systematics. Systematics Association Special Volume 58 (R. Scotland and R. T. Pennington, eds.). Taylor and Francis, New York.
28. Hawkins, J. A., C. E. Hughes, and R. W. Scotland. 1997. Primary homology assessment, characters and character states. Cladistics 13:275-293.
29. Hennig, W. 1950/1966. Phylogenetic systematics. University of Illinois Press, Urbana (Translation by D. E. Rosen, G. Nelson, and C. Patterson).
30. Hood, G. 2002. PopTools, ver. 2.4.9. Pest Animal Control Co-operative Research Centre, CSIRO, Canberra, Australia. http://www.cse. csiro.au/CDG/poptools/index.htm
31. Jacoby, L. L., and L. R. Brooks. 1984. Nonanalytic cognition: Memory, perception, and concept learning. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 18:1-47.
32. Jardine, N. 1969. The observational and theoretical components of homology: A study on the morphology of dermal skull-roofs of riphidistrian fishees. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 1:327-361.
33. Kirchoff, B. K. 2001. Character description in phylogenetic analysis: Insights from Agnes Arber's concept of the plant. Ann. Bot. 88:1203-1214.
34. Kitching, I. J., P. L. Forey, C. J. Humphries, and D. M. Williams. 1998. Cladistics. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
35. Kluge, A. G., and J. S. Farris. 1969. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool. 18:1-32.
36. Mantel, N. 1967. The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res. 27:209-220.
37. Mast, A., and T. J. Givnish. 2002. Historical biogeography and the origin of stomatal distributions in Banksia and Dryandra (Proteaceae) based on their cpDNA phylogeny. Am. J. Bot. 89:1311-1323.
38. McDonald, S. L. 2001. A competitive evaluation of the relative judgment versus context-specific processing hypotheses for the sequential superiority effect. Dissertation. The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
39. McShea, D. W. 1996. Complexity and homoplasy. Pages 207-225 in Homoplasy: The recurrence of similarity in evolution (M. J. Sanderson and L. Hufford, eds.). Academic Press, San Diego.
40. McShea, D. W. 2001. Parts and integration: Consequences of hierarchy. Pages 27-60 in Evolutionary patterns: Growth, form and tempo in the fossil record (J. B. C. Jackson, S. Lidgard, and F. K. McKinney, eds.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
41. McShea, D. W., and E. P. Venit. 2001. What is a part? Pages 259-284 in The character concept in evolutionary biology (G. Wagner, ed). Academic Press, San Diego.
42. Moss, W. W. 1971. Taxonomic repeatability: An experimental approach. Syst. Zool. 20:309-330.
43. Page, R. D. M. 1993. COMPONENT: Tree comparison software for Microsoft Windows, version 2.0. The Natural History Museum, London.
44. Page, R. D. M. 1996. TREEVIEW: An application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 12:357-358.
45. Patterson, C. 1982. Morphological characters and homology. Pages 21-74 in Problems in phylogenetic reconstruction (K. A. Joysey and A. E. Friday, eds.). Academic Press, London.
46. Platnick, N. I. 1979. Philosophy and the transformation of Cladistics. Syst. Zool. 28:537-546.
47. Poe, S., and J. J. Wiens. 2000. Character selection and the methodology of morphological phylogenetics. Pages 20-36 in Phylogenetic analysis of morphological data (J. J. Wiens, ed.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
48. Remane, A. 1952. Die Grundlagen des naturlichen Systems der vergleichenden Anatomie und der Phylogenetik. Gesst und Portig, Leipzig.
49. Rhodes, G., S. Brake, and A. P. Atkinson. 1993. What's lost in inverted faces? Cognition 47:25-57.
50. Rieppel, O. 1994. Homology, topology, and typology: The history of modern debates. Pages 63-100 in Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology (B. K. Hall, ed.). Academic Press, San Diego.
51. Salthe, S. N. 1985. Evolving hierarchical systems. Columbia University Press, New York.
52. SAS Institute. 1999. The SAS System for Windows, Version 8.00, SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
53. Schooler, J. W., and T. Y. Engstler-Schooler. 1990. Verbal overshadowing of visual memories: Some things are better left unsaid. Cogn. Psychol. 22:36-71.
54. Sokal, R. R., and F. J. Rohlf. 1980. An experiment in taxonomic judgment. Syst. Bot. 5:341-365.
55. Spalding, T. L., and G. L. Murphy. 1996. Effects of background knowledge on category construction. J. Exp. Psychol.: Learn. Mem. Cogn. 22:525-538.
56. Stevens, P. F. 1984. Homology and phylogeny: Morphology and systematics. Syst. Bot. 9:395-409.
57. Stevens, P. F. 1991. Character states, morphological variation, and phylogenetic analysis: A review. Syst. Bot. 16:553-583.
58. Stevens, P. F. 2000. On characters and character states: Do overlapping and non-overlapping variation, morphology and molecules, all yield data of the same value? Pages 81-105 in Coding characters of phylogenic analysis (R. Scotland and R. T. Pennington, eds.). Systematics Association Special Volume Series 58. Cambridge, UK.
59. Stuessy, T. F. 1990. Plant taxonomy: The systematic evaluation of comparative data. Columbia University Press, New York.
60. Swofford, D. L. 1991. When are phylogeny estimates from molecular and morphological data incongruent? Pages 295-333 in Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences (M. M. Miyamoto and J. Cracraft, eds.). Oxford University Press, New York.
61. Swofford, D. L., and D. P. Begle. 1993. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony, Ver. 3.1. Illinois Natural History Survey. Champaign, IL.
62. Swofford, D. L. 2002. PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (and Other Methods) 4.0 Beta for Macintosh. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
63. Takane, Y., and J. Sergent. 1983. Multidimensional scaling models for reaction times and same-different judgments. Psychometrika 48:393-423.
64. Tanaka, J. W., and J. A. Sengco. 1997. Features and their configuration in face recognition. Mem. Cogn. 25:583-592.
65. Thiele, K. 1993. The Holy Grail of the perfect character: The cladistic treatment of morphometric data. Cladistics 9:275-304.
66. Thiele, K., and P. Y. Ladiges. 1996. A cladistic analysis of Banksia (Proteaceae). Aust. Syst. Bot. 9:661-733.
67. Wells, G. L., and B. Hryciw. 1984. Memory for faces: Encoding and retrieval operations. Mem. Cogn. 12:338-344.
68. Young, A. W., D. Hellawell, and D. C. Hay. 1987. Configural information in face recognition. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 3:59-70.
69. Zuloaga, F. O., O. Morrone, and L. M. Giussani. 2000. A cladistic analysis of the Paniceae: A preliminary approach. Pages 123-135 in Grasses: Systematics and evolution (S. W. L. Jacobs and J. Everett, eds.). CSIRO, Melbourne.