Premium
The importance of comprehensive phylogenetic (evolutionary) classification—a response to S chmidt‐ L ebuhn's commentary on paraphyletic taxa
Author(s) -
Stuessy Tod F.,
Hörandl Elvira
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
cladistics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.323
H-Index - 92
eISSN - 1096-0031
pISSN - 0748-3007
DOI - 10.1111/cla.12038
Subject(s) - paraphyly , cladistics , divergence (linguistics) , phylogenetic tree , sister group , taxon , biology , evolutionary biology , systematics , epistemology , clade , taxonomy (biology) , zoology , philosophy , ecology , biochemistry , linguistics , gene
The review of paraphyly in botanical systematics by Schmidt‐Lebuhn brings together a number of useful perspectives for the reader. It fails to offer new ideas, however, and it does not recognize the fallacies of strict cladistic classification, namely accepting only holophyletic groups, and insisting that sister groups have the same rank. The reason for adherence to these rules is to maintain the convenience of cladistic classification. While convenience in biological classification by itself is not necessarily bad, it becomes unacceptable when its use overshadows achieving a higher level of evolutionary (and phylogenetic) information content. Evolutionary divergence and reticulation are both significant parts of the evolutionary process that cannot be ignored in biological classification and that are necessary for high predictive quality.