Stems, nodes, crown clades, and rank‐free lists: is Linnaeus dead?

@article{Benton2000StemsNC,
  title={Stems, nodes, crown clades, and rank‐free lists: is Linnaeus dead?},
  author={Michael J. Benton},
  journal={Biological Reviews},
  year={2000},
  volume={75}
}
  • M. Benton
  • Published 1 November 2000
  • Biology
  • Biological Reviews
Recent radical proposals to overhaul the methods of biological classification are reviewed. The proposals of phylogenetic nomenclature are to translate cladistic phylogenies directly into classifications, and to define taxon names in terms of clades. The method has a number of radical consequences for biologists: taxon names must depend rigidly on the particular cladogram favoured at the moment, familiar names may be reassigned to unfamiliar groupings, Linnaean category terms (e.g. phylum… 
Phylogenetic hypotheses, taxa and nomina in zoology
TLDR
There is an urgent need for the zoological Code to cover these nomina with automatic and stringent rules leaving no place to subjective interpretation, and the distinction should be made clear between taxonomic categories, which have biological definitions, and nomenclatural ranks, which do not.
Towards a phylogenetic nomenclature of Tracheophyta
TLDR
Criteria and approaches used here to choose among competing preexisting names for a clade, to select a definition type, to choose appropriate specifiers, and to restrict the use of a name to certain phylogenetic contexts may be widely applicable when naming other clades.
SHOULD PALEONTOLOGISTS USE “PHYLOGENETIC” NOMENCLATURE?
  • G. Dyke
  • Biology
    Journal of Paleontology
  • 2002
TLDR
A few areas of PN that make it an especially problematic proposal for paleontologists are highlighted.
Stability, ranks, and the PhyloCode
TLDR
Phylogenetic nomenclature does not force one to officially name poorly corrobo− rated groupings, whereas Linnean codes compel users to erect and name genera even when relevant supraspecific re− lationships are poorly known.
Phylogeny, classification and nomenclature: a reply to F. Pleijel and G. W. Rouse
TLDR
Approaches to introduce a so-called PhyloCode should therefore not be pursued, as there is no chance at all that this kind of code could be generally accepted.
The Phylocode: Beating a dead horse? - Discussion
TLDR
The Phylocode extends reg− ulation beyond names and their proper use into determining the validity of phylogenetic hypotheses, and this will act as a limit on normal scientific debate.
Optimality of phylogenetic nomenclatural procedures
TLDR
The present contribution suggests that the cladotypic procedure outperforms all other proposed procedures, producing an optimal formal lexicon useful for naming and communicating about species and taxa.
The Phylocode: Beating a dead horse?
TLDR
The Phylocode extends reg− ulation beyond names and their proper use into determining the validity of phylogenetic hypotheses, and this will act as a limit on normal scientific debate.
Are the linnean and phylogenetic nomenclatural systems combinable? Recommendations for biological nomenclature.
TLDR
It is seen as essential that species binomen, including the formal rank of genus, are retained, and species should continue to be linked to type specimens and the use of other formal ranks should be minimized.
Proposal of an integrated framework of biological taxonomy: a phylogenetic taxonomy, with the method of using names with standard endings in clade nomenclature
TLDR
An integrated framework of biological taxonomy is proposed, in which the advantages of phylogenetic taxonomy and traditional, Linnaean nomenclature, together with the temporal banding methods are synthesized, without deteriorating the strength of theoretical coherence.
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 83 REFERENCES
Stability in meaning and content of taxon names: an evaluation of crown-clade definitions
  • Michael S. Y. Lee
  • Biology
    Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
  • 1996
TLDR
There is no compelling reason to radically redefine familiar taxon names such as Aves, Mammalia and Tetrapoda to apply to ‘crown-clades’: monophyletic groups bounded by extant forms, and it is possible to attach such well-known taxonNames to more-inclusive groups that closely approximate ‘traditional’ usage.
Problems in Cladistic Classification: Higher-Level Relationships in Land Plants
TLDR
Modifications are needed that permit a more straightforward integration of systematic knowledge and botanical nomenclature, and at the same time foster increased stability in the association between names and the groups of organisms that they designate.
Phylogeny as a Central Principle in Taxonomy: Phylogenetic Definitions of Taxon Names
Defining the names of taxa in terms of common ancestry, that is, using phylogenetic definitions of taxon names, departs from a tradition of character-based definitions by granting the concept of
Phylogenetics, Taxonomy, and Historical Biogeography of Alligatoroidea
TLDR
Parsimony analysis of 164 discrete morphological characters supports several previous hypotheses based on morphology and molecules that Alligatoroidea is a monophyletic alligatoroid lineage and the paraphyly of “Allognathosuchus” is indicated.
The Linnaean Hierarchy and the Evolutionization of Taxonomy, with Emphasis on the Problem of Nomenclature
TLDR
The historical trend of granting increasing importance to the principle of descent has reduced the significance of the Linnaean hierarchy to the point where it may no longer be worth retaining.
Cladistic information in phylogenetic definitions and designated phylogenetic contexts for the use of taxon names
TLDR
Whereas phylogenetic definitions stabilize the meaning of taxon names, designated phylogenetic contexts would stabilize the usage of those names and describe in an n-taxon statement that would be appended to the phylogenetic definition.
Definitions in phylogenetic taxonomy: critique and rationale.
A general rationale for the formulation and placement of taxonomic definitions in phylogenetic taxonomy is proposed, and commonly used terms such as "crown taxon" or "node-based definition" are more
EXPLICITNESS, STABILITY, AND UNIVERSALITY IN THE PHYLOGENETIC DEFINITION AND USAGE OF TAXON NAMES: A CASE STUDY OF THE PHYLOGENETIC TAXONOMY OF THE CARNIVORA (MAMMALIA)
TLDR
Conventions can promote universality in the formation, definition, and usage of taxon names in phylogenetic taxonomy and help to promote the ac- ceptance of phylogeneticTaxonomy by biologists.
Ancestry, Paleontology, and Definition of the Name Mammalia
TLDR
characters and contents to a Hennigian unit of descent more in keeping with the goals of the Darwinian Revolution (de Queiroz, 1988), and an apparent inability to separate the name Mammalia from the dade it resents, betrays the typological elements that still persist in current taxonomy.
Scleromochlus taylori and the origin of dinosaurs and pterosaurs
TLDR
A reanalysis of crown–group archosaur relationships confirms the split into Crurotarsi (crocodile relatives) and Ornithodira (bird relatives), as well as the clear division of Ornithadira into Pterosauria and Dinosauromorpha.
...
...