[Previous by date - Re: RE: a comment on ancestor]
[Next by date - Fwd: Re: RE: a comment on ancestor]
[Previous by subject - Re: RE: a comment on ancestor]
[Next by subject - Re: RE: a comment on ancestor]
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:29:48 +0300
From: "Igor Ya. Pavlinov" <igor_pavlinov@zmmu.msu.ru>
To: de Queiroz Kevin <Dequeiroz.Kevin@NMNH.SI.EDU>
Cc: PhyloCode <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: RE: a comment on ancestor
By nomenclature instability I mean simultaneous application of different nomenclatorial codes. That is was my question about supposed relation of the PhyloCode to the International Code: the matter is, as far as you are going to reject binomials, the publications gauged by PhyloCode will be unavailable from International Code standpoint by definition. So any athour will be free to give his/her own name to the yours because of its unavailability. Of course, any transition from one system to another presumes wider "transitional polimorphysm": earlier post-Linnean taxonomy of XVIII-XIX centures is good an example. So, however right you may be about a new taxonomic phylosophy must imply a new taxonomic language, in order to make Phylocode novelties less idiosyncratic, they have to be pretty accurately formulated, keeping in mind that "any system is afraid of novelties" and the drastically is a novelty the more frightened is the system (I mean, taxonomic community). For instance, I see no causes not to preserve taxonomic dyagnoses in the PhyloCode, at least in form of synapomorphy list, without which allocation of a new item to already established classification will appear a very sophisticated task. I know several persons over here who tried to apply PhyloCode rules in their practical revisions but finally rejected this practice just because of unpracticality of these rules. ----- Original Message ----- From: de Queiroz Kevin <Dequeiroz.Kevin@NMNH.SI.EDU> To: <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>; <igor_pavlinov@zmmu.msu.ru> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:55 PM Subject: Re: RE: a comment on ancestor > The application of names to different sets of organisms/species in the > context of different phylogenetic (or, in general, taxonomic) hypotheses > occurs both in phylogenetic and in traditional nomenclature. So > phylogenetic nomenclature is similar to traditional nomenclature in this > respect. Moreover, several authors have argued that this sort of > instability is not only necessary but desirable. Stability of nomenclature > that results from stability of taxonomic hypotheses means that our views > about relationships are no longer changing. The stagnation implied by this > state of affairs (assuming that we will never know everything about > phylogeny) has lead some authors to adopt the slogan "stability is > ignorance." > > Kevin > > Kevin de Queiroz > Division of Amphibians & Reptiles > Smithsonian Institution > P.O. Box 37012 > NHB, Room W203, MRC 162 > Washington, D.C. 20013-7012 > Voice: 202-357-2212 > FAX: 202-786-2979 > E-mail: dequeiroz.kevin@nmnh.si.edu > > >>> "Igor Ya. Pavlinov" <igor_pavlinov@zmmu.msu.ru> - 2/10/04 1:15 AM >>> > > > The method or methods used to infer phylogenetic relationships is a > > taxonomic rather than a nomenclatural issue; therefore, it is outside of > the > > jurisdiction of the PhyloCode. Consequently, systematists are free to > use > > whatever methods they like (even UPGMA!) to infer phylogenetic > > relationships; however, some methods (such as UPGMA) will make it more > > difficult for them to satisfy other requirements of phylogenetic > nomenclatue > > (such as providing a diagnosis), and their use may affect how widely the > > conclusions are accepted by other researchers. > > > > THAT'S JUST WHAT SAID AT THE VARY BEGINNING OF CURRENT DISCUSSIAN: > APPLYING > PHYLOCODE WITH ITS STRICT DIFINITION OF OBJECTS TO BE NAMED VALIDLY SEEMS > TO > LEAD TO GREAT INSTABILITY OF NOMENCLATURE. > > > Kevin > > > > > > Kevin de Queiroz > > Division of Amphibians & Reptiles > > Smithsonian Institution > > P.O. Box 37012 > > NHB, Room W203, MRC 162 > > Washington, D.C. 20013-7012 > > Voice: 202-357-2212 > > FAX: 202-786-2979 > > E-mail: dequeiroz.kevin@nmnh.si.edu >