Phylogenetic nomenclature is compatible with diverse philosophical perspectives

Zoologica Scripta

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 587-591

  Pleijel, Fredrik ^a   Härlin, Mikael ^b  

^a MUSÉUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE   (France)

^b SÖDERTÖRN UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 8744255494     PISSN: 03003256     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0300-3256.2004.00164.x     Document Type: Review

References (74)

1. Baum, D. A. (1998). Individuality and the existence of species through time. Systematic Biology, 47, 641-653.
2. Benton, M. J. (2000). Stems, nodes, crown clades, and rank-free lists: is Linnaeus dead? Biology Reviews, 75, 633-648.
3. Boyd, R. (1999). Homeostasis, species, and higher taxa. In R. A. Wilson (Ed.) Species. New Interdisciplinary Essays (pp. 141-185). Cambridge: MIT Press.
4. Brower, A. V. Z. (2000). Homology and the inference of systematic relationships: some historical and philosophical perspectives. In R. Scotland & R. T. Pennington (Eds) Homology and Systematics (pp. 11-21). London: Taylor & Francis.
5. Brower, A. V. Z. (2002). Cladistics, phylogeny, evidence and explanation - a reply to Lee. Zoologica Scripta, 31, 221-223.
6. Cantino, P. D. & de Queiroz, K. (2000). PhyloCode: a phylogenetic code of biological nomenclature (http://www.ohiou.edu/phylocode).
7. Carpenter, J. M. (2003). Critique of pure folly. Botanical Review, 69, 79-92.
8. Coleman, K. A. & Wiley, E. O. (2001). On species individualism: a new defense of the species-as-individuals hypothesis. Philosophy of Science, 68, 498-517.
9. Dominguez, E. & Wheeler, Q. D. (1997). Taxonomic stability is ignorance. Cladistics, 13, 367-372.
10. Edwards, A. W. F. & Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (1964). Reconstruction of evolutionary trees. In W. H. Heywood & J. McNeill (Eds) Phenetic and Phylogenetic Classification (pp. 66-76). London: Systematics Association.
11. Eldredge, N. & Cracraft, J. (1980). Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.
12. Farris, S. J. (1983). The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis. In V. A. Funk & N. I. Platnick (Eds) Advances in Cladistics 2 (pp. 7-36). New York: Columbia University Press.
13. Farris, S. J. (1985). The pattern of cladistics. Cladistics, 1, 190-201.
14. Felsenstein, J. (1973). Maximum likelihood and minimum-steps methods for estimating evolutionary trees from data on discrete characters. Systematic Zoology, 22, 240-249.
15. Forey, P. L. (2001). The PhyloCode: description and commentary. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 58, 81-96.
16. Frost, D. R. & Kluge, A. G. (1994). A consideration of epistemology in systematic biology, with special reference to species. Cladistics, 10, 259-295.
17. Ghiselin, M. T. (1966). An application of the theory of definitions to systematic principles. Systematic Zoology, 15, 127-130.
18. Ghiselin, M. T. (1984). 'Definition', 'character', and other equivocal terms. Systematic Zoology, 33, 104-110.
19. Ghiselin, M. T. (1995). Ostensive definitions of the names of species and clades. Biology and Philosophy, 10, 219-222.
20. Ghiselin, M. T. (1997). Metaphysics and the Origin of Species. New York: State University of New York Press.
21. Gosliner, T. M. & Ghiselin, M. T. (1984). Parallel evolution in ophistobranch gastropods and its implications for phylogenetic methodology. Systematic Zoology, 19, 1-18.
22. Griffiths, G. C. D. (1974). On the foundations of biological systematics. Acta Biotheoretica, 23, 85-131.
23. Griffiths, P. E. (1999). Squaring the circle: natural kinds with historical essences. In R. A. Wilson (Ed.) Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays (pp. 209-228). Cambridge: MIT Press.
24. Härlin, M. (1998). Taxonomic names and phylogenetic trees. Zoologica Scripta, 27, 381-390.
25. Härlin, M. (2003 a). On the relationship between content, ancestor, and ancestry in phylogenetic nomenclature. Cladistics, 19, 144-147.
26. Härlin, M. (2003b). Taxon names as paradigms: the structure of nomenclatural revolutions. Cladistics, 19, 138-143.
27. Härlin, M. & Sundberg, P. (1998). Taxonomy and philosophy of names. Biology and Philosophy, 13, 233-244.
28. Hennig, W. (1966). Phylogenetic Systematics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
29. Huelsenbeck, J. P. & Ronquist, F. (2001). MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics, 17, 754-755.
30. Hull, D. L. (1976). Are species really individuals? Systematic Zoology, 25, 174-191.
31. Hull, D. L. (1978). A matter of individuality. Philosophy of Science, 45, 335-360.
32. Keller, R. A., Boyd, R. N. & Wheeler, Q. D. (2003). The illogical basis of phylogenetic nomenclature. Botanical Review, 69, 93-110.
33. Kitching, I. J., Forey, P. L., Humphries, C. J. & Williams, D. M. (1998). Cladistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34. Kluge, A. G. (2001). Philosophical conjectures and their refutation. Systematic Biology, 50, 322-330.
35. Kluge, A. G. (2002). Distinguishing 'or' from 'and' and the case for historical identification. Cladistics, 18, 585-593.
36. Kluge, A. G. (2004). Taxonomy in theory and practice, with arguments for a new phylogenetic system of taxonomy. In M. A. Donnely, B. I. Crother, C. Guyer, M. H. Wake & M. E. White (Eds) Ecology and Evolution in the Tropics: a Herpetological Perspective (pp. 1-81). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
37. Kripke, S. (1972). Naming and Necessity. Gateshead: Athenæum Press.
38. Lee, M. S. Y. (1998). Ancestors and taxonomy. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 13, 26.
39. Lidén, M., Oxelman, B., Backlund, A., Andersson, L., Bremer, B., Eriksson, R., Moberg, R., Nordal, I., Persson, K., Thulin, M. & Zimmer, B. (1997). Charlie is our darling. Taxon, 46, 735-738.
40. Mahner, M. & Bunge, M. (1997). Foundations of Biophilosophy. Berlin: Springer.
41. Mishler, B. D. (1999). Getting rid of species? In R. A. Wilson (Ed.) Species. New Interdisciplinary Essays (pp. 307-315). Cambridge: MIT Press.
42. Nelson, G. (1985). Class and individual: a reply to M. Ghiselin. Cladistics, 1, 386-389.
43. Nelson, G. (1994). Homology and systematics. In B. K. Hall (Ed.) Homology: the Hierarchical Basis of Comparative Biology (pp. 101-149). San Diego: Academic Press.
44. Nelson, G. & Platnick, N. I. (1991). Three-taxon statements: a more precise use of parsimony? Cladistics, 7, 351-366.
45. Nixon, K. C. & Carpenter, J. M. (2000). On the other 'phylogenetic systematics'. Cladistics, 16, 298-318.
46. Nixon, K. C., Carpenter, J. M. & Stevenson, D. W. (2003). The PhyloCode is fatally flawed, and 'Linnaean' system can easily be fixed. Botanical Review, 69, 111-120.
47. Patterson, C. (1978). Verifiability in systematics. Systematic Zoology, 27, 218-222.
48. Platnick, N. I. (1979). Philosophy and the transformation of cladistics. Systematic Zoology, 28, 537-546.
49. Platnick, N. I. (1985). Philosophy and the transformation of cladis-tics revisited. Cladistics, 1, 87-94.
50. Platnick, N. I., Humphries, C. J., Nelson, G. & Williams, D. M. (1996). Is Farris optimization perfect?: three-taxon statements and multiple branching. Cladistics, 12, 243-252.
51. Pleijel, F. (1999). Phylogenetic taxonomy, a farewell to species, and a revision of Heteropodarke (Annelida, Polychaeta, Hesionidae). Systematic Biology, 48, 755-789.
52. Pleijel, F. & Rouse, G. W. (2000). Least-inclusive taxonomic unit: a new taxonomic concept for biology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biology Sciences, 267, 627-630.
53. Pleijel, F. & Rouse, G. W. (2003). Ceci n'est pas une pipe: names, clades, and phylogenetic nomenclature. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 41, 162-174.
54. de Queiroz, K. (1988). Systematics and the Darwinian revolution. Philosophy of Science, 55, 238-259.
55. de Queiroz, K. (1992). Phylogenetic definitions and taxonomic philosophy. Biology and Philosophy, 7, 295-313.
56. de Queiroz, K. (1994). Replacement of an essentialistic perspective on taxonomic definitions as exemplified by the definition of 'Mammalia'. Systematic Biology, 43, 497-510.
57. de Queiroz, K. (1995). The definitions of species and clade names: a reply to Ghiselin. Biology and Philosophy, 10, 223-228.
58. de Queiroz, K. & Gauthier, J. (1990). Phylogeny as a central principle in taxonomy: phylogenetic definitions of taxon names. Systematic Zoology, 39, 307-322.
59. de Queiroz, K. & Gauthier, J. (1992). Phylogenetic taxonomy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 23, 449-480.
60. de Queiroz, K. & Gauthier, J. (1994). Toward a phylogenetic system of biological nomenclature. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 9, 27-31.
61. de Queiroz, K. & Poe, S. (2001). Philosophy and phylogenetic inference: a comparison of likelihood and parsimony methods in the context of Karl Popper's writings on corroboration. Systematic Biology, 50, 305-321.
62. de Queiroz, K. & Poe, S. (2003). Failed refutations: further comments on parsimony and likelihood methods and their relationship to Popper's degree of corroboration. Systematic Biology, 52, 352-367.
63. Ruse, M. (1987). Biological species: natural kinds, individuals, or what? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 38, 225-242.
64. Saitou, N. & Nei, M. (1987). The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 4, 406-425.
65. Schander, C. & Thollesson, M. (1995). Phylogenetic taxonomy - some comments. Zoologica Scripta, 24, 263-268.
66. Schuh, R. T. (2003). The Linnaean system and its 250-year persistence. Botanical Review, 69, 59-78.
67. Siddall, M. E. & Kluge, A. G. (1997). Probabilism and phylogenetic inference. Cladistics, 13, 313-336.
68. Swofford, D. L., Olsen, G. J., Waddell, P. J. & Hillis, D. M. (1996). Phylogenetic inference. In D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz & B. K. Mable (Eds) Molecular Systematics (pp. 407-514). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
69. Wiley, E. O. (1980). Is the evolutionary species fiction? - A consideration of classes, individuals, and historical entities. Systematic Zoology, 29, 76-80.
70. Wiley, E. O. (1981). Phylogenetics. The Theory and Practice of Phylogenetic Systematics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
71. Wiley, E. O. (1989). Kinds, individuals, and theories. In M. Ruse (Ed.) What the Philosophy of Biology Is (pp. 289-300). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
72. Wilgenbusch, J. & de Queiroz, K. (2000). Phylogenetic relationships among the phrynosomatid sand lizards inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences generated by heterogeneous evolutionary processes. Systematic Biology, 49, 592-612.
73. Williams, D. M. & Siebert, D. J. (2000). Characters, homology and three-item analysis. In R. Scotland & R. T. Pennington (Eds) Homology and Systematics (pp. 183-208). London: Taylor & Francis.
74. Wilson, R. A. (1999). Realism, essence, and kind: resuscitating species essentialism? In R. A. Wilson (Ed.) Species. New Interdisciplinary Essays (pp. 187-207). Cambridge: MIT Press.