Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-30T06:47:01.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - How to Study Classification

Natural Methods I: Consensus Revisited

from Part IV - How to Study Classification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 July 2020

David M. Williams  and
Malte C. Ebach
David M. Williams
Affiliation:
Natural History Museum, London
Malte C. Ebach
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney
Get access

Summary

In Chapter 7 we noted that ‘the single most important principle of cladistics is that diverse fundamental cladograms may be combined to form a single general cladogram’ (Nelson 1979, p. 7) and that while the construction of general cladograms may related to consensus methods they are not necessarily the product of any particular kind of consensus method. We have discussed a few elements of consensus methods in Chapter 9. Below we pursue one version in a little more detail.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cladistics
A Guide to Biological Classification
 , pp. 273 - 286
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beckemeyer, RJ. 2015. In remembrance: Charles Duncan Michener (Sept 22, 1918–Nov 1, 2015). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 88: 457–464.Google Scholar
Candolle, A-P. de. 1804. Essai sur les propriétés médicales des plantes, comparées avec leurs formes extérieures et leur classification naturelle. Didot Jeune, Paris.Google Scholar
Cavalier-Smith, T. & Scoble, JM. 2013. Phylogeny of Heterokonta: Incisomonas marina, a uniciliate gliding opalozoan related to Solenicola (Nanomonadea), and evidence that Actinophryida evolved from raphidophytes. European Journal of Protistology 49: 328–353.Google Scholar
Farris, JS. 1997. Cycles. Cladistics 13: 131–144.Google Scholar
Farris, JS. & Kluge, AG. 1998. A/The brief history of three-taxon analysis. Cladistics 14: 349–362.Google Scholar
Farris, JS., Kluge, AG. & De Laet, JE. 2001. Taxic revisions. Cladistics 17: 79–103.Google Scholar
Futuyma, DR. 2012. Robert R. Sokal (1926−2012). Science 336: 816.Google Scholar
Hull, DL. 1988. Science As a Process. An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.Google Scholar
Kim, E., Yubuki, N., Leander, BS. & Graham, LE. 2010. Ultrastructure and 18S rDNA Phylogeny of Apoikia lindahlii comb. nov. (Chrysophyceae) and its epibiontic Protists, Filos agilis gen. et sp. nov. (Bicosoecida) and Nanos amicus gen. et sp. nov. (Bicosoecida). Protist 161: 177–196.Google Scholar
Liebherr, JK. 1986. Cladistic analysis of North American Platynini and revision of the Agonum extensicolle species group (Coleoptera: Carabidae). University of California Publications in Entomology 106: 1–198.Google Scholar
Michener, CD. 1977. Discordant evolution and the classification of allodapine bees. Systematic Zoology 26: 32–56.Google Scholar
Michener, CD. 2007. The professional development of an entomologist. Annual Review of Entomology 52: 1–15.Google Scholar
Michener, CD. & Sokal, RR. 1957. A quantitative approach to a problem of classification. Evolution 11: 130–162.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. 1979. Cladistic analysis and synthesis: principles and definitions, with a historical note on Adanson’s Familles des Plantes. Systematic Zoology 28: 1–21.Google Scholar
Nelson, GJ. & Ladiges, PY. 2001. Gondwana, vicariance biogeography, and the New York School revisited. Australian Journal of Botany 49: 389–409.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Platnick, NI. 1980. Multiple branching in cladograms: two interpretations. Systematic Zoology 29: 86–91.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. & Platnick, NI. 1981. Systematics and Biogeography: Cladistics and Vicariance. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Nordal, I. 1987. Cladistics and character weighting: a contribution to the compatibility versus parsimony discussion. Taxon 36: 59–60.Google Scholar
Page, RDM. 1988. Quantitative cladistic biogeography: constructing and comparing area cladograms. Systematic Zoology 37: 254–270.Google Scholar
Page, RDM. 1990. Component analysis: a valiant failure? Cladistics 6: 119–136.Google Scholar
Patterson, C. 1982. Morphological characters and homology. In: Joysey, KA. & Friday, AE. (eds), Problems of Phylogenetic Reconstruction. Academic Press, London, pp. 21–74.Google Scholar
Rieppel, O. 2007a. The nature of parsimony and instrumentalism in systematics. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 45: 177–183.Google Scholar
Rieppel, O. 2007b. Parsimony, likelihood, and instrumentalism in systematics. Biology and Philosophy 22: 141–144.Google Scholar
Scotland, RW. 1992. Cladistic theory. In: Forey, PL., Humphries, CJ., Kitching, IJ., Scotland, RW. & Williams, DM. Cladistics. A Practical Course in Systematics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 3–13.Google Scholar
Scotland, RW. & Steel, M. 2015. Circumstances in which parsimony but not compatibility will be provably misleading. Systematic Biology 64: 492–504.Google Scholar
Sokal, RR. 1985. The principles of numerical taxonomy: Twenty five years later. In: Goodfellow, M., Jones, D., & Priest, EG. (eds), Computer-Assisted Bacterial Systematics. Academic Press, London, pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
Williams, DM. & Ebach, MC. 2008. Foundations of Systematics and Biogeography. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Williams, DM. & Ebach, MC. 2017. What is intuitive taxonomic practice? Systematic Biology 66: 637–643.Google Scholar
Wilson, EO. 1965. A consistency test for phylogenies based on contemporaneous species. Systematic Zoology 14: 214–220.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×