Abstract
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.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.