[Taxacom] What is Homo sapiens

[John Grehan]

Since cladistics is about systematic relationship rather than defining
taxonomic units of course there is no cladistic definition of a genus. A
genus can be of any extent so long as it meets the requirements of
monophyly - as Stephen observed. With respect to neanderthals one might
choose to place them outside Homo or within. Either choice is potentially
possible.

John Grehan



<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:31 PM, Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org>
wrote:

> Sure, Stephen, there is a "universal criterion for what constitutes a
> genus". A genus is a nexus of radiation from one ancestral species,
> adaptive or otherwise. Since cladistics does not focus on multifurcations
> but seeks to eliminate them, there is no cladistic definition of a genus.
> Anyone whose ideational straightjacket is cladistics cannot even
> conceptualize a natural, empirically defined genus concept.
>
>
> Richard
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of Stephen
> Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 6:13 PM
> To: taxacom; Tony Rees
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] What is Homo sapiens
>
> "By logical extension, hypothetical neanderthalensis and heidelbergensis
> clades, regardless of their relationship to a sapiens clade, should be
> regarded as separate genera"
>
> By logical extension, I would infer that the author is a cladist with
> little or no understanding of taxonomy! The quoted statement is nonsense at
> every level! It just makes no sense at all! There are no universal
> taxonomic criteria for what constitutes a genus (other than monophyly).
> Therefore you just make the genus Homo inclusive enough to include all 3
> clades - easy peasy, problem solvedy!
>
> Stephen
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 31/5/18, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Taxacom] What is Homo sapiens
>  To: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>  Received: Thursday, 31 May, 2018, 11:00 AM
>
>  From the cited paper:
>  "...For, if the suggestion of a clade that includes
>  H. sapiens is correct, it follows that Homo
>  should be restricted to members
>  of this
>  clade. By logical extension, hypothetical neanderthalensis
>  and
>  heidelbergensis clades, regardless of
>  their relationship to a sapiens
>  clade,
>  should be regarded as separate genera." This sounds
>  like devil's
>  advocacy to me (or
>  reduction to the absurd) - if workers cannot even agree
>  on whether of not neanderthalensis is a
>  subspecies of sapiens, putting it
>  into a
>  separate genus makes no sense to this observer - or perhaps
>  I am
>  missing something.
>
>  Also I noticed an odd statement at the
>  beginning - "Thus it fell upon
>  Blumenbach (1969) to provide the first
>  morphological diagnosis of Homo
>  sapiens." - especially considering that
>  the Blumenbach in question died
>  some 129
>  years earlier (I remembered from the recent thread in which
>  we
>  discussed the earliest scientific name
>  for the dingo). I checked the cited
>  reference and it is a 1969 reprint of an 1865
>  work published under the
>  title "The
>  anthropological treatises of Johann Friedrich
>  Blumenbach", in
>  which is reprinted
>  Blumenbach's "On the natural variety of
>  mankind",
>  first(?) published in 1775.
>  So if "Blumenbach (1969)" were replaced by
>  "Blumenbach
>  (1775)"
>  it would make rather more sense. Hopefully the remainder of
>  the
>  paper is a bit more factually correct
>  :)
>
>  Regards - Tony
>
>  Tony Rees, New South Wales,
>  Australia
>  https://about.me/TonyRees
> [https://aboutme.imgix.net/background/users/t/o/n/
> tonyrees_1442476357_27.jpg?q=80&dpr=1&auto=format&fit=crop&
> w=250&h=140&crop=faces]<https://about.me/TonyRees>
>
> Tony Rees - New South Wales, Australia | about.me<https://about.me/
> TonyRees>
> about.me
> I am a software engineer in New South Wales, Australia. Visit my website.
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Taxacom Mailing List
>  Send
>  Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
>  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 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
> 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 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
> 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 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
>