[Previous by date - lineages of true crabs]
[Next by date - Call for nominations, PN meeting]
[Previous by subject - lineages of true crabs]
[Next by subject - on universaliy of Phylocode]
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:54:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: StephanPickering@cs.com
To: paleo_bio_dinosaur_ontology@yahoogroups.com
Cc: birds-and-landscapes@yahoogroups.com, darkraptorsdinosaurclub@yahoogroups.com, jurassicdavesdinoclub@yahoogroups.com, phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu, thedinosaurabyss@yahoogroups.com, theraptorsrealm@yahoogroups.com, theropod_dinosaurs@yahoogroups.com
Subject: new thoughts proposed on the PhyloCode
--Boundary_(ID_QaFbFxM8YBg6yq9fWNIasw) Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit How many species? It's all in the mind of the beholder. Ronald Sluys, 1997. Paper, New Directions in Systematics Workshop, European Science Foundation Network in Systematic Ecology, Hersonissos, Crete, 15-18 October. ABSTRACT: The answer to the question "How many species?" depends on the particular species concept that is being used. The more commonly used species concepts can be arranged under two headings, viz. those that emphasize process as a grouping criterion, and those that concentrate on patterns of diversification. Two aspects that have received much attention in the delimitation of species entities are common descent (monophyly) and interbreeding (or the related aspect, reproductive isolation). Application of species concepts based on either the notion of interbreeding or common descent can give conflicting results. The various evolutionary processes divide biodiversity in at least three major classes of species, viz. interbreeding, ecological, and phylogenetic units. A species concept should group organisms into species that represent real entities in nature and that exist independent of the discovery procedures applied. Examples taken from ornithology illustrate that documenting the number of species in a group depends very much on the way in which we look at biodiversity, i.e. on the particular species concept that is used. This pluralistic approach to species entities and species concepts refines but also complicates our documentation of biodiversity and necessitates an even greater effort from the side of systematic biologists and systematic institutions and museums. Following logically from the pluralistic approach to species, it is recommended (1) not to over-emphasize groups that are traditionally considered as species-rich, and (2) to select taxonomic groups suitable for studying alternative species concepts and alternative ways of looking at biodiversity within each of these groups, capitalizing on expertise, collections and other resources available in Europe. *************************** cf. Ronald Sluys, Koen Martens, F.R. Schram, 2004. The PhyloCode: naming of biodiversity at a crossroads. Trends in Ecology & Evolution IN PRESS Michael J. Donoghue & Jacques A. Gauthier, 2004. Implementing the PhyloCode. Trends in Ecology & Evolution IN PRESS STEPHAN PICKERING / Chofetz Chayim ben-Avraham The Dinosaur Fractals Project 2333 Portola Drive # 4 Santa Cruz, California 95062-4250 USA stephanpickering@cs.com website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/paleo_bio_dinosaur_ontology theropod research summarized: <www.dinodata.net> see under PICKERING at their Reference Base --Boundary_(ID_QaFbFxM8YBg6yq9fWNIasw) Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SAN= SSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><B>How many species? It's all in the mind=20= of the beholder. Ronald Sluys, 1997. Paper, New Directions in Systematics Wo= rkshop, European Science Foundation Network in Systematic Ecology, Hersoniss= os, Crete, 15-18 October. ABSTRACT:</B> The answer to the question "How many= species?" depends on the particular species concept that is being used. The= more commonly used species concepts can be arranged under two headings, viz= . those that emphasize process as a grouping criterion, and those that conce= ntrate on patterns of diversification. Two aspects that have received much a= ttention in the delimitation of species entities are common descent (monophy= ly) and interbreeding (or the related aspect, reproductive isolation). Appli= cation of species concepts based on either the notion of interbreeding or co= mmon descent can give conflicting results. The various evolutionary processe= s divide biodiversity in at least three major classes of species, viz. inter= breeding, ecological, and phylogenetic units. A species concept should group= organisms into species that represent real entities in nature and that exis= t independent of the discovery procedures applied. Examples taken from ornit= hology illustrate that documenting the number of species in a group depends=20= very much on the way in which we look at biodiversity, i.e. on the particula= r species concept that is used. This pluralistic approach to species entitie= s and species concepts refines but also complicates our documentation of bio= diversity and necessitates an even greater effort from the side of systemati= c biologists and systematic institutions and museums. Following logically fr= om the pluralistic approach to species, it is recommended (1) not to over-em= phasize groups that are traditionally considered as species-rich, and (2) to= select taxonomic groups suitable for studying alternative species concepts=20= and alternative ways of looking at biodiversity within each of these groups,= capitalizing on expertise, collections and other resources available in Eur= ope. <BR> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COL= OR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D5 PTSIZE=3D18 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG= =3D"0">*************************** <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COL= OR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D4 PTSIZE=3D14 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG= =3D"0">cf. Ronald Sluys, Koen Martens, F.R. Schram, 2004. The PhyloCode: nam= ing of biodiversity at a crossroads. <I>Trends in Ecology & Evolution IN= PRESS <BR></I>Michael J. Donoghue & Jacques A. Gauthier, 2004. Implementing th= e PhyloCode.<I> Trends in Ecology & Evolution IN PRESS</FONT><FONT COLO= R=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2=20= PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"></I> =20 <BR> <BR> <BR></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COL= OR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D1 PTSIZE=3D8 FAMILY=3D"SERIF" FACE=3D"Georgia" LANG=3D"0= "><B>STEPHAN PICKERING / Chofetz Chayim ben-Avraham <BR>The Dinosaur Fractals Project <BR>2333 Portola Drive # 4 <BR>Santa Cruz, California 95062-4250 USA <BR>stephanpickering@cs.com <BR>website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/paleo_bio_dinosaur_ontology <BR>theropod research summarized: <www.dinodata.net> see under PICKERI= NG at their Reference Base <BR> <BR> <BR></B></FONT></HTML> --Boundary_(ID_QaFbFxM8YBg6yq9fWNIasw)--