Message 2005-12-0062: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:55:06 +0000

[Previous by date - Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Next by date - Re: Repost: An alternative to the Companion Volume?]
[Previous by subject - Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Next by subject - Re: PhyloCode in Cladistics]

Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:55:06 +0000
From: [unknown]
Subject: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications

I think then that since no agreement amongst the PhyloCoders is in a =
prediction, the concept of species should be dumped for combinations =
PhyloCode and if as it appears to be that Phylocode will win it will =
not be for=20
Evolution either. It can still be a useful concept for others in Biol=
ogy like=20
bird watchers. Maybe PhyloCoders will insist I say Dinosaur watchers.
Yisrael Asper
Pittsburgh PA

> > How about accepting the last part for Species for PhyloCode:Indiv=
> > groups whose members are diverging from one another towards separ=
> > species if not prevented from doing so. Sounds vague enough?
> It's circular. It defines "species" using "species".
> But anyway, I think agreeing on one species concept is far from an =
> problem. Let's concentrate on the clades first. Maybe the use of sp=
> will simply fade away for asexual organisms and fossils once the Ph=
> is up and running.
> --=20
> Lust, ein paar Euro nebenbei zu verdienen? Ohne Kosten, ohne Risiko=
> Satte Provisionen f=FCr GMX Partner:


Feedback to <> is welcome!