[Taxacom] Rankless classifications
Paul van Rijckevorsel
dipteryx at freeler.nl
Tue Mar 17 23:34:34 CDT 2009
From: "Kenneth Kinman" <kennethkinman at webtv.net>
And how about the cactus example. Search for Cactales at NCBI and
you get NO RESULTS. What percentage of classification end-users know
that Cactaceae has been dumped by strict cladists into Carophyllales.
***
I would guess that a very high percentage of end-users would look for
Cactaceae in Caryophyllales, which traditionally is the mainstream placement
(and has been for at least a century?), and also is the choice of Arthur
Cronquist, whose system was used so pervasively.
Google hits:
Cactaceae+Cactales : 2.220
Cactaceae+Caryophyllales : 75.700
A much more controversial case would be Polygonales, or a level lower:
Chenopodiaceae or Capparidaceae. (Entering Polygonales into the NCBI browser
leads to Caryophyllales, so this is covered. I would guess Cactales is too
unusual to merit the same attention?)
Best wishes,
Paul
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list