[Taxacom] Three kinds of bacteria (Negibacteria the oldest)

[Tony Rees]

Hi Ken,

In Ruggiero et al's 2015 classification of living organisms (on which T.
Cavalier-Smith is an author), Archaea and Bacteria are recognised at
kingdom level, with no subkingdoms defined in Archaea, and subkingdoms
Negibacteria and Posibacteria recognised in Bacteria. All are in
"superkingdom" Prokaryota, as opposed to Eukaryota (for the other/big
stuff).

Quoted from that paper:
"We have chosen to adopt the classification in current use by the Catalogue
of Life. It is derived from the TOBA [Taxonomic Outline of Bacteria and
Archaea] and recognizes Bacteria and Archaea as equivalent in rank to the
eukaryote kingdoms." (Elsewhere is is noted that TOBA and List of
Prokaryotic Names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN) "treat Bacteria and
Archaea as separate domains but are silent about the category of kingdom".)

That is the explanation offered, not sure if it answers your question...

Best regards - Tony

Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
https://about.me/TonyRees

On 16 December 2017 at 04:21, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>         I am puzzled why the prokaryotes are still classified as Domains
> Bacteria and Archaea.  The most fundamental divide should actually be
> between Negibacteria (which possess the outer negibacterial membrane) on
> the one hand, and the Posibacteria and Archaebacteria (which have lost that
> outer membrane).   Cavalier-Smith 1998 proposed the name Unibacteria for
> Posibacteria + Archaebacteria (since they have only the one membrane, not
> two).
>       Cavalier-Smith, 2006 ("Rooting the tree of life by transition
> analyses") shows that Negibacteria are the oldest of the three taxa, and
> Archaebacteria are actually the youngest.   I am pretty sure that is why
> eubacterial trees are so screwed up, because using Archaebacteria as the
> outgroup will misroot them (Archaebacteria are actually an ingroup, not an
> outgroup).
>       Anyway, the names Negibacteria and Posibacteria were proposed 30
> years ago (Cavalier-Smith, 1987), and they are excellent names which
> subdivide the Eubacteria into two large and important taxa.  So why aren't
> they being used in databases like Catalogue of Life and NCBI's Taxonomy
> Browser, etc. ?  The Three Domain classification of life is outdated and
> should have been discarded a long time ago.
>                     -----------------Ken Kinman
> Cavalier-Smith, 2006:
>         https://openi.nlm.nih.gov/detailedresult.php?img=
> PMC1586193_1745-6150-1-19-2&req=4
> Evolutionary relationships among the four major kinds o | Open-i<
> https://openi.nlm.nih.gov/detailedresult.php?img=
> PMC1586193_1745-6150-1-19-2&req=4>
> openi.nlm.nih.gov
> Evolutionary relationships among the four major kinds of cell. The
> horizontal red arrow indicates the position of the universal root as
> inferred from the first
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.
>