Fallacies and false premises—a critical assessment of the arguments for the recognition of paraphyletic taxa in botany

@article{SchmidtLebuhn2012FallaciesAF,
  title={Fallacies and false premises—a critical assessment of the arguments for the recognition of paraphyletic taxa in botany},
  author={Alexander N. Schmidt‐Lebuhn},
  journal={Cladistics},
  year={2012},
  volume={28}
}
One of the central controversies in contemporary taxonomy and systematics revolves around whether to accept or to reject paraphyletic taxa. The present review is the result of a survey of the ongoing discussion in botany over the past ca. 15 years, and attempts to systematically and critically assess all individual arguments presented for the formal recognition of paraphyletic groups in the classification of life. Where arguments are found to be without merit, rebuttals are presented in the… Expand
“Evolutionary” classifications do not have any information content—a reply to Stuessy and Hörandl
TLDR
The author examines the arguments advanced by proponents of the acceptance of paraphyletic taxa in the botanical literature to examine if any of them stood up to critical evaluation, and finds none of the claims to be convincing. Expand
The importance of comprehensive phylogenetic (evolutionary) classification—a response to Schmidt‐Lebuhn's commentary on paraphyletic taxa
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 theExpand
Which changes are needed to render all genera of the German flora monophyletic?
TLDR
The monophyly of all genera of vascular plants found in Germany is assessed and could serve as a guide to the likely consequences of systematic research for the taxonomy of the German flora and the floras of neighbouring countries. Expand
Evidence-based review of the taxonomic status of New Zealand's endemic seed plant genera
TLDR
It is argued that the circumscriptions of genera (and higher taxa) should always be monophyletic, preferably with strong support from independent evidence, and several criteria are helpful: phylogeny should be recoverable from the classification hierarchy, genera should be distinctive, ranks should not be redundant and familiar names should be retained if other criteria are met. Expand
Monophyly or Paraphyly– The Taxonomy of Holcoglossum (Aeridinae: Orchidaceae)
TLDR
Based on the analyses of molecular and morphological evidence, the results suggest that the clade comprising Holcoglossum s.l.s., Ascolabium, Penkimia and Ascocentrum himalaicum is strongly supported as a monophyly, and that the three taxa are nested within different subclades of Holcogsodium s.s. would facilitate a better understanding of pollinator-driven floral divergence and vegetative stasis. Expand
The Generification of the Fossil Record
TLDR
Ideally, evolutionary studies that are actually about species should be pursued using species-level data rather than proxy data tabulated using genera, and greater critical attention should be focused on the degree to which attributes tabulated at the generic level reflect biological properties and processes at the species level. Expand
Phylogenetic classifications are informative, stable, and pragmatic: the case for monophyletic taxa
TLDR
A school of classification largely abandoned by systematists is proposed, in which both monophyletic and paraphyletic groups are formally recognized, and phylogenetic classification is returned. Expand
A formal analysis of phylogenetic terminology: Towards a reconsideration of the current paradigm in systematics
TLDR
It is proposed that in a future revision, the BioCode should approve a dual system by recognizing both a phyletic arrangement made of clades and a phylogenetic classification made of taxa, a compromise that should make possible the coexistence of the two main opposing schools of systematics. Expand
Paraphyly, modern systematics and the transfer of Dryandra into Banksia (Proteaceae): a response to George
TLDR
Criticism of the Dryandra transfer by Alex George and colleagues, and its acceptance by the majority of practicing systematists on the other, is an example of competition between differing paradigms rather than George’s claimed specific shortcomings of the transfer or the analyses on which it was based. Expand
A community‐derived classification for extant lycophytes and ferns
TLDR
A modern, comprehensive classification for lycophytes and ferns, down to the genus level, utilizing a community‐based approach, that uses monophyly as the primary criterion for the recognition of taxa, but also aims to preserve existing taxa and circumscriptions that are both widely accepted and consistent with the understanding of pteridophyte phylogeny. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 45 REFERENCES
Paraphyly, ancestors, and the goals of taxonomy: A botanical defense of cladism
TLDR
It is argued that paraphyletic higher taxa are artificial classes created by taxonomists who wish to emphasize particular characters or phenetic “gaps,” and that formal recognition of such taxa conveys a misleading picture of common ancestry and character evolution. Expand
Philosophy and the Transformation of Cladistics
TLDR
The main principles of the Hennigian system are that the basic process of organic evolution is the splitting of an ancestral species into two descendant species and that each dichotomy should be taken as marking the origin of two new units of classification; and that the hierarchic level of such units should be determined by the geological time when the dichotomy occurred. Expand
Character‐based phylogenetic Linnaean classification: taxa should be both ranked and monophyletic
Three primary philosophical positions have emerged among systematists concerning the relationship between phylogenetic analysis and biological classification. The first of these, expressed in aExpand
Paraphyletic groups as natural units of biological classification
TLDR
It is demonstrated that paraphyly is a natural transitional stage in the evolution of taxa, and that it occurs regularly along with holophyly, and it is stressed the importance of degrees of divergence plus similarity (cohesiveness of evolutionary features) as additional criteria for classification. Expand
Further dogged defense of paraphyletic taxa
TLDR
I was pleased and interested to see the reply to my paper by such prominent opponents as Nelson, Murphy & Ladiges (2003) in which they have credited me with dogged defense of paraphyly over a period of eight years. Expand
Neglecting evolution is bad taxonomy
TLDR
The author provides a brief outline of strength and weaknesses of different concepts of classifications, and gives a plea for the here proposed evolutionary classification (in the sense of Mayr & Bock, 2002). Expand
Taxonomy versus evolution
TLDR
It is argued that distinction between diachronous and synchronous classification schemes is of primary importance in taxonomy and introduced new terms, monoclady, paraclady and polyclady, all referring to the respective conditions of groups of organisms in a cladogram. Expand
Explicit Approaches for Evolutionary Classification
TLDR
This paper presents several approaches toward explicit evolutionary classification, involving different combinations of cladistic, patristic, and phenetic information, all of which are explicitly derived. Expand
Monophyly and paraphyly: A discourse without end?
TLDR
Resolution is possible provided that the terms monophyly and paraphyly are used for diachronous classifications and phylogenetic trees; (b) monoclady and paraclady for synchronousclassifications and cladograms of contemporaneous organisms; and (c) monothety and non-monothety for groups in classifications derived by the pattern cladistic approach. Expand
Brummitt on paraphyly: a response
TLDR
Part of Brummitt's repeated message (Brummitt, 2002) is a challenge: "Until somebody can draw for us a phylogenetic tree...divided fully into Linnaean taxa without any being paraphyletic, the authors will continue to believe that their arguments on the inevitability of paraphYletic taxa are correct". Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...