[Taxacom] Hijacking paraphyletic taxon names (but thankfully not Crustacea)

[Stephen Thorpe]

On a more serious note, if insects are descendants of crustaceans, then although Parcrustacea saves insects from being crustaceans, what happens to the paraphyletic Crustacea? Have we lost crustaceans?

--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 11/2/18, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Hijacking paraphyletic taxon names (but thankfully not Crustacea)
 To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 Received: Sunday, 11 February, 2018, 9:34 AM
 
 
 
 Hi all,
        We
 probably wouldn't be having a debate about paraphyletic
 taxa if the strict cladists hadn't hijacked the names of
 major paraphyletic taxa, especially those with large
 exgroups.  Instead of creating a new clade
  name, Sarcopterygii was hijacked and a huge exgroup (all
 the tetrapods) shoved into it.  It completely changed the
 meaning of Sarcopterygii.  Same with Reptilia and
 Dinosauria (shoving all the birds into them).  If they
 wanted a clade uniting dinosaurs and
  birds, they should have come up with a new name instead of
 greatly changing the meaning of taxon Dinosauria. 
 
 
 
        Luckily
 this was done in one major case.  The clade name
 Pancrustacea was created for crustaceans and their hexapod
 descendants.  The name Crustacea wasn't hijacked. 
 Thank goodness.  
            
  ---------------Ken  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 From: Stephen Thorpe
 <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 
 Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 10:53 PM
 
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; Kenneth Kinman
 
 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Insects are crustacean
 descendants vs. "insects ARE crustaceans"
  
 
 
 Ken,
 
 I think the cladist mind thinks that a taxon includes all
 its decendants, so whatever name applies to the taxon also
 applies to all its decendants. So, tetrapods are
 Sarcopterygia/sarcopterygians. Sort of makes sense.
 Tetrapods are also animals, eukaryotes,
  etc.
 
 Stephen
 
 --------------------------------------------
 
 On Sat, 10/2/18, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com>
 wrote:
 
 
 
  Subject: [Taxacom] Insects are crustacean descendants vs.
 "insects ARE  crustaceans"
 
  To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 
  Received: Saturday, 10 February, 2018, 4:10 PM
 
  
 
  Hi all,
 
        
 
  The present discussion about paraphyly reminds me of
 strict
 
  cladists insisting that "birds ARE
 dinosaurs",
 
  rather than "birds are dinosaur descendants". 
 I
 
  suppose they might think that they are preparing the
 next
 
  generation of young dinosaur lovers to support strict
 
  cladists and perhaps even become future strict
 cladists.
 
  
 
        But not all dinosaur
 
  researchers think that this is a good idea.  In his
 paper
 
  Origin of Birds: The Final Solution? (American
 Zoologist:
 
  Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 504-512), Peter Dodson says:
 "For
 
  example, the word dinosaur was not previously problematic
 -
 
  it was universally understood. Within cladistics it has
 now
 
  been redefined to include birds ... and then a new and
 
  cumbersome phrase, non-avian dinosaur, has been
 substituted.
 
  This is not progress; this is semantic obfuscation not
 
  enlightened communication."
 
  
 
         I agree that it is semantic
 
  obfuscation.  Saying "Birds are dinosaurs"
 
  (instead of birds are dinosaur descendants) is  like
 saying
 
  "Tetrapods are sarcopterygian fish" (instead
 of
 
  Tetrapods are descendants of sarcopterygian fish).  Or
 how
 
  about "Insects are crustaceans", rather than
 
  "Insects are crustacean descendants."
 
  
 
         In all these cases,
 
  you would be trying to force a well-known exgroup taxon
 back
 
  into its mother taxon.  In other words, it is a war
 against
 
  paraphyletic taxa which would become glaringly absurd
 if
 
  applied across the board.  How about "Vertebrates
 are
 
  invertebrates" instead of "Vertebrates are
 
  invertebrate descendants"?
 
         
 
            -----------------Ken Kinman
 
  
 
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
 
  _______________________________________________
 
  Taxacom Mailing List
 
  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
 
  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 
 
 
 
 Taxacom Info Page -
 mailman.nhm.ku.edu Mailing Lists
 
 mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 
 Taxacom is an e-mail list for biological systematics. Named
 and brought to life by Drs. Richard Zander and Patricia
 Eckel, Taxacom began its peripatetic existence on ...
 
 
 
 
 
 
  The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 
  searched at: 
 http://taxacom.markmail.org
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Taxacom Home - MarkMail -
 Community libraries
 
 taxacom.markmail.org
 
 MarkMail is developed and hosted by MarkLogic Corporation.
 MarkMail is a free service for searching mailing list
 archives, with huge advantages over traditional ...
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  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
 
 
 
 
 Taxacom Info Page -
 mailman.nhm.ku.edu Mailing Lists
 
 mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 
 Taxacom is an e-mail list for biological systematics. Named
 and brought to life by Drs. Richard Zander and Patricia
 Eckel, Taxacom began its peripatetic existence on ...
 
 
 
 
 
 
  You can reach the person managing the list at:
 
  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 
  
 
  Nurturing Nuance while
 
  Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.