[Taxacom] Cyanoprokaryota help

[JF Mate]

I believe the convention is to try to make them monophyletic as long as you
don't create a worse mess. Turning a stem group into  a dozen smaller,
often identical new groups does little but increase the diversity of names.
It is not real knowledge.

Jason
On Mar 20, 2013 5:29 PM, "Richard Zander" <Richard.Zander at mobot.org> wrote:

> My apologies, Dan, but my response was directed at your asseveration
> that:
>
>
>
> "However, I have not been convinced that allowing paraphyletic
> classifications is a good solution, but this is not the place to go into
> the gritty details. Therefore, I stick to the general convention of
> naming exclusively monophyletic entities."
>
>
>
> My remarks were directed at the phrase "general convention of naming
> exclusively monophyletic entities." Since avoiding naming nodes is also
> part of this convention, neither molecular or morphological
> phylogenetics can determine monophyly. This is true for species
> relationships or deep lineages. Instead one must infer process from
> cladistic diagrams, not classification directly.
>
>
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> A correction: Confusius said: "Those who wield the Numchucks of Truth in
> haste may hit themselves in the kidney." I really meant "ancestral to
> TWO or more derived..." not "ancestral to one or more derived..."
>
>
>
> ____________________________
> Richard H. Zander
> Missouri Botanical Garden, PO Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA
> Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/
> <http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/>  and
> http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
> <http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm>
> Modern Evolutionary Systematics Web site:
> http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/21EvSy.htm
> <http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/21EvSy.htm>
> UPS and FedExpr -  MBG, 4344 Shaw Blvd, St. Louis 63110 USA
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: daniel.lahr at gmail.com [mailto:daniel.lahr at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Dan Lahr
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 6:47 AM
> To: Richard Zander
> Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Cyanoprokaryota help
>
>
>
> My apologies Richard, but I do not see how your commentary relates to
> this thread.  I mean this comment literally, as in, you will have to
> explain it a bit further.
>
> We never discussed molecular vs morphological, I do not understand how
> that is relevant here. We are also not discussing species relationships,
> but deep lineages.  Additionally, I do not see a connection between your
> interpretations of ancestor-descendant relationship scenarios and
> phylogenetic resolution. In my view, both cases you have pointed out
> only indicate error in the initial naming, ie, if a genus nests within
> another, this means renaming is necessary.  This does not indicate a
> general flaw with the reconstruction method.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Richard Zander
> <Richard.Zander at mobot.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Not objective? The fundamental phylogenetic presupposition that of any
> three species two are more closely related fails totally in two cases:
>
> 1) paraphyly, including nesting of genera among species of other genera.
>
> 2) when any one generalist, wide-ranging extant species can be easily
> hypothesized as ancestral to one or more derived, highly specialized,
> and possibly evolutionarily dead-end descendant species.
>
> Both cases are common. Ergo phylogenetic resolution of branch order is
> commonly random in both morphological and molecular analyses. This is
> not even subjective much less objective.
>
>
> ____________________________
> 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
> UPS and FedExpr -  MBG, 4344 Shaw Blvd, St. Louis 63110 USA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Dan Lahr
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 4:22 PM
> To: Ken Kinman
> Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Cyanoprokaryota help
>
> Hi Ken,
>
> I am familiar with your views on strictly monophyletic classifications.
> I personally find the discussion constructive for science.  However, I
> have not been convinced that allowing paraphyletic classifications is a
> good solution, but this is not the place to go into the gritty details.
> Therefore, I stick to the general convention of naming exclusively
> monophyletic entities.
>
> Dividing life into Prokaryota and Eukaryota is unsatisfactory, because
> these are grades and do not lead to any objectivity, and do not reflect
> things we know about the true nature of the critters.
>
> There may surely be a possibility that the root of life is within
> bacteria, which would make eukaryotes and archaea simply branches on the
> bacterial tree.  If so, then a lot of bacterial groups would need to be
> renamed, because our understanding of the true diversity will remain
> restrictive and flawed if we do not change the names.
>
> The system allows relabeling when relabeling is needed.  The Woesian
> revolution has shown that relabeling was needed, and relabeling ensued.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ___________________
> Daniel J. G. Lahr, PhD
>
> Assist. Prof., Dept of Zoology,
>
> Univ. of Sao Paulo, Brazil
>
> + 55 (11) 3091 0948 <tel:%2B%2055%20%2811%29%203091%200948>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>