Beyond cladistics: Extending evolutionary classifications into deeper time levels

Taxon

Volumn 59, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 345-350

  Hörandl, Elvira ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLADISTICS; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; TAXONOMY;

EID: 77950926866     PISSN: 00400262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tax.592001     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Albach, D. 2008. Further arguments for the rejection of paraphyletic taxa: Veronica subgen. Pseudolysimachium (Plantaginaceae). Taxon 57: 1-6.
2. Alexander, P.J. 2006. Descent and modification in evolutionary systematics. Taxon 55: 4.
3. Bateman, R.M., Hilton, J. & Rudall, P.J. 2006. Morphological and molecular phylogenetic context of the angiosperms: Contrasting the 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' approaches used to infer the likely characteristics of the first flowers. J. Exp. Bot. 13: 3471-3503.
4. 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.
5. Brickell, C.D., Crawley, M., Cullen, J., Frodin, D.G., Gardner, M., Grey-Wilson, C., Hillier, J., Knees, S., Lancaster, R., Mathew, B.F., Matthews, V.A., Miller, T., Noltie, H.F., Norton, S., Oakeley, H.J., Richards, J. & Woodhead, J. 2008. Do the views of users of taxonomic output count for anything? Taxon 57: 1047-1048.
6. Brummitt, R.K. 2002. How to chop up a tree. Taxon 51: 31-41.
7. Brummitt, R.K. 2006. Am I a bony fish? Taxon 55: 2-3.
8. Brummitt, R.K. 2008. Evolution in taxonomic perspective. Taxon 57: 1049-1050.
9. Cantino, P.D., Doyle, J.A., Graham, S.W., Judd, W.S., Olmstead, R.G., Soltis, D.E., Soltis, P.S. & Donoghue, M.J. 2007. Phylogenetic nomenclature of Tracheophyta. Taxon 56: 822-846.
10. De Queiroz, K. 2006. The PhyloCode and the distinction between taxonomy and nomenclature. Syst. Biol. 55: 160-162.
11. Doyle, J.A. 1996. Seed plant phylogeny and the relationships of Gnetales. Int. J. Pl. Sci. 157: S3-S39.
12. Ebach, M.C., Williams, D.M. & Morrone, J.J. 2006. Paraphyly is bad taxonomy. Taxon 55: 831-832.
13. Emadzade, K., Lehnebach, C., Lockhart, P. & Hörandl, E. In press. A molecular phylogeny, morphology and classification of genera of Ranunculeae (Ranunculaceae). Taxon.
14. Farjon, A. 2007. In defence of a conifer taxonomy which recognizes evolution. Taxon 56: 639-641.
15. Futuyma, D.J. 2005. Evolution. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer.
16. Hajibabaei, M., Xia, J. & Drouin, G. 2006. Seed plant phylogeny: Gnetophytes are derived conifers and a sister group to Pinaceae. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 40: 208-217
17. Härlin, M. 2003. On the relationship between content, ancestor, and ancestry in phylogenetic nomenclature. Cladistics 19: 144-147.
18. Hilton, J. & Bateman, R. J. 2006. Pteridosperms are the backbone of seed-plant phylogeny. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 133: 119-168.
19. Hörandl, E. 2006. Paraphyletic versus monophyletic taxa-evolutionary versus cladistic classifications. Taxon 55: 564-570.
20. Hörandl, E. 2007. Neglecting evolution is bad taxonomy. Taxon 55: 1-5.
21. Hörandl, E., Greilhuber, J., Klimova, K., Paun, O., Temsch, E., Emadzade, K. & Hodálová, I. 2009. Reticulate evolution and taxonomic concepts in the Ranunculus auricomus complex (Ranunculaceae): Insights from morphological, karyological and molecular data. Taxon 58: 1194-1215.
22. Huson, D.H. & Bryant, D. 2006. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Molec. Biol. Evol. 23: 254-267.
23. Joly, S., McLenachan P.A. & Lockhart, P.J. 2009. A statistical approach for distinguishing hybridization and incomplete lineage sorting. Amer. Naturalist 174: E54-E70.
24. Knoop, V. & Müller, K. 2006. Gene und Stammbäume: ein Handbuch zur molekularen Phylogenetik. Munich: Elsevier.
25. Mayr, E. & Bock, W.J. 2002. Classifications and other ordering systems. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 40: 169-194.
26. Mishler, B.D. 2009. Three centuries of paradigm changes in biological classification: Is the end in sight? Taxon 58: 61-67.
27. Nordal, I. & Stedje, B. 2005. Paraphyletic taxa should be accepted. Taxon 54: 5-6.
28. Pisani, D., Cotton, J.A. & McInerney, J.O. 2007. Supertrees disentangle the chimerical origin in the eukaryotic genomes. Molec. Biol. Evol. 24: 1752-1760.
29. Podani, J. 2009. Taxonomy versus evolution. Taxon 58: 1049-1053.
30. Richter, S., Moller, O.S., Wirkner, C.S. 2009. Advances in Crustacean phylogenetics. Arthropod Syst. Phylog. 67: 275-286.
31. Rudall, P.J. & Bateman, R.M. 2007. Developmental bases for key innovations in the seed-plant microgametophyte. Trends Pl. Sci. 12: 317-326.
32. Stevens, P.F. 2006. An end to all things? Plants and their names. Austral. Syst. Bot. 19: 115-133.
33. Stuessy, T.F. 2004. A transitional-combinational theory for the origin of angiosperms. Taxon 53: 3-16.
34. Stuessy, T.F. 2009a. Paradigms in biological classification (1707-2007): Has anything really changed? Taxon 58: 68-76.
35. Stuessy, T.F. 2009b. Plant taxonomy: The systematic evaluation of comparative data, 2nd ed. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
36. Stuessy, T.F. & König, C. 2008. Patrocladistic classification. Taxon 57: 594-601.
37. Van de Peer, Y., Maere, S. & Meyer, A. 2009. The evolutionary significance of ancient genome duplications. Nature Rev. Genet. 10: 725-732.
38. Van Wyk, A.E. 2007. The end justifies the means. Taxon 56: 645-648.
39. Wiley, E.O. 2009. Patrocladistics, nothing new. Taxon 58: 2-6.
40. Wood, T.E., Takebayashi, N., Barker, M.S., Mayrose I., Greenspoond P.B. & Rieseberg L.H. 2009. The frequency of polyploid speciation in vascular plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 13875-13879.