[Taxacom] Usefulness vs. convenience (Protista)

[Richard Zander]

Stephen:

If you try to mix classifications based on patterns of evidence (phylogenetics) and classifications based on theories of evolution of a group (evolutionary systematics) you will always get a mish-mash of apples and oranges. A paraphyletic group is a synchronic (one-dimensional present-day) view of a diachronic (through time) evolutionary process. The phylogenetic view is from well-supported evidence and the evolutionary view is theory. Only the last is science. The first is artificial.

R. 
* * * * * * * * * * * * 
Richard H. Zander 
Missouri Botanical Garden, PO Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA 
Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/ and http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
Modern Evolutionary Systematics Web site: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/21EvSy.htm


-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:12 PM
To: Curtis Clark; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Usefulness vs. convenience (Protista)

>But name me an uncrackable paraphyletic group

basal Bilateria ... where do Acoela and Nematodermata fit in? Xenoturbellida?

>Certainly Reptilia seems well-cracked

then please point me to a fully-worked out published Linnean classification 
which is congruent with the phylogeny (i.e., with mammals and birds as 
subordinate to the class Reptilia, but still with Linnean ranks) ...

Stephen