Paraphyletic versus monophyletic taxa - Evolutionary versus cladistic classifications

Taxon

Volumn 55, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 564-570

  Hörandl, Elvira ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749540423     PISSN: 00400262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/25065631     Document Type: Note

References (39)

1. Adams, K. L. & Wendel, J. F. 2005. Polyploidy and genome evolution in plants. Curr. Opinion Pl. Biol. 8: 135-141.
2. Arnold, M. L. 1997. Natural Hybridization and Evolution. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
3. Brummitt, R. K. 2002. How to chop up a tree. Taxon 51: 31-41.
4. Brummitt, R. K. 2003. Further dogged defense of paraphyletic taxa. Taxon 52: 803-804.
5. Brummitt, R. K. 2006. Am I a bony fish? Taxon 55: 268-269.
6. Brummitt, R. K. & Sosef, M. S. M. 1998. Paraphyletic taxa are inherent in Linnaean classification - a reply to Freudenstein. Taxon 47: 411-412.
7. Burleigh, J. G. & Mathews, S. 2004. Phylogenetic signal in nucleotide data from seed plants: implications for resolving the seed plant tree of life. Amer. J. Bot. 91: 1599-1613.
8. Cantino, P. D. & de Queiroz, K. 2004. PhyloCode: A Phylogenetic Code of Biological Nomenclature. http://www.ohiou.edu/phylocode.
9. Comai, L. 2005. The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid. Nature Rev. Genet. 6: 836-846.
10. De Queiroz, K. & Gauthier, J. 1992. Phylogenetic taxonomy. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23: 449-480.
11. Dias, P., Assis, L. C. S. & Udulutsch, R. G. 2005. Monophyly vs. paraphyly in plant systematics. Taxon 54: 1039-1040.
12. Fourment, M. & Gibbs, M. J. 2006. PATRISTIC: a program for calculating patristic distances and graphicallly comparing the components of genetic change. BioMed Central Evolutionary Biology 6: doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-6- 1
13. Freudenstein, J. V. 1998. Paraphyly, ancestors, and classification - a response to Sosef and Brummitt. Taxon 47: 95-104.
14. Grant, V. 1981. Plant Speciation, ed. 2. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
15. Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Systematics. Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana.
16. Hörandl, E., Paun, O., Johansson, J. T., Lehnebach, C., Armstrong, T., Chen, L. & Lockhart, P. 2005. Phylogenetic relationships and evolutionary traits in Ranunculus s.l. (Ranunculaceae) inferred from ITS sequence analysis. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 36: 305-327.
17. Kellogg, E. & Bennetzen, J. L. 2004. The evolution of nuclear genome structure in seed plants. Amer. J. Bot. 91: 1709-1725.
18. Linder, C. R. & Rieseberg, L. H. 2004. Reconstructing patterns of reticulate evolution in plants. Amer. J. Bot. 91: 1700-1708.
19. Mayr, E. & Ashlock, P. D. 1991. Principles of Systematic Zoology, ed. 2. McGraw-Hill, New York.
20. Mayr, E. & Bock, W. J. 2002. Classifications and other ordering systems. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Research 40: 169-194.
21. McBreen, K. & Lockhart, P. J. 2006. Reconstructing reticulate evolutionary histories of plants. Trends Pl. Science 11: 398-404.
22. McDade, L. A. 1995. Hybridization and phylogenetics. Pp. 305-331 in: Hoch, P. C. & Stephenson, A. G. (eds.), Experimental and Molecular Approaches to Plant Biosystematics. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis.
23. Nelson, G., Murphy, D. J. & Ladiges, P. Y. 2003. Brummitt on paraphyly: a response. Taxon 52: 295-298.
24. Nordal, I. & Stedje, B. 2005. Paraphyletic taxa should be accepted. Taxon 54: 5-6.
25. Paun, O., Johansson, J. T., Lehnebach, C., Armstrong, T., Chen, L., Lockhart, P. & Hörandl, E. 2005. Phylogenetic relationships and biogeography of Ranunculus and allied genera (Ranunculaceae) in the Mediterranean region and in the European Alpine System. Taxon 54: 911-930.
26. Potter, D. & Freudenstein, J. V. 2005. Character-based phylogenetic Linnaean classification: taxa should be both ranked and monophyletic. Taxon 54: 1033-1035.
27. Ramsey, J. & Schemske, D. W. 1998. Pathways, mechanisms, and rates of polyploid formation in flowering plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29: 467-501
28. Rapp, R. A. & Wendel, J. F. 2005. Epigenetics and plant evolution. New Phytol. 168: 81-91.
29. Rieseberg, L. H. & Ellstrand, N. C. 1993. What can molecular and morphological markers tell us about plant hybridization? Crit. Rev. Pl. Sci. 12: 213-241.
30. Rieseberg, L. H. & Morefield, J. D. 1995. Character expression, phylogenetic reconstruction, and the detection of reticulate evolution. 1995. Pp. 333-353 in: Hoch, P. C. & Stephenson, A. G. (eds.), Experimental and Molecular Approaches to Plant Biosystematics. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis.
31. Rieseberg, L. H., Raymond, O., Rosenthal, D. M., Lai, Z., Livingstone, K., Nakazato, T., Durphy, J., Schwarzbach, A. E., Donovan, L. A. & Lexer, C. 2003. Major ecological transitions in wild sunflowers facilitated by hybridization. Science 301: 1211-1216.
32. Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., Schemske, D. W., Hancock, J. F., Thompson, J. N., Husband, B. C. & Judd, W. S. In press. Autopolyploidy in angiosperms: have we grossly underestimated the number of species? Taxon 55.
33. Sosef, M. S. M. 1997. Hierarchical models, reticulate evolution and the inevitability of paraphyletic supraspecific taxa. Taxon 46: 75-85.
34. Stuessy, T. F. 1987. Explicit approaches for evolutionary classification. Syst. Bot. 12: 251-262.
35. Stuessy, T. F. 1990. Plant Taxonomy: the Systematic Evaluation of Comparative Data. Columbia Univ. Press, Columbia.
36. Stuessy, T. F. 1997. Classification: more than just branching patterns of evolution. Aliso 15: 113-124.
37. Stuessy, T. F. & Crawford, D. J. 1990. Patterns of phylogeny in the endemic vascular flora of Juan Fernández Islands, Chile. Syst. Bot. 15: 338-346.
38. th International IOPB Symposium, Amsterdam, The Netherland. Hugo de Vries Laboratory, Univ. Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
39. Vriesendorp, B. & Bakker, F. T. 2005. Reconstructing patterns of reticulate evolution in angiosperms: what can we do? Taxon 54: 593-604.