PhyloCode: Pain, No Gain

The PhyloCode suggests that by adopting its rules, taxonomists will gain clarity, uniqueness and stability compared with the use of Linnaean Taxonomy. This claim is questioned here by suggesting (1) that replacing the Types of Linnaean Taxonomy with the Specifiers of PhyloCode increases the complexi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Taxon 2002-02, Vol.51 (1), p.43-54
Main Author: Forey, Peter L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animal names
Biological taxonomies
Birds
Evolution
Linnaean Hierarchy Symposium
Linnaean taxonomy
PhyloCode
Phylogenetic nomenclature
Phylogenetics
Phylogeny
Plant names
Specifiers
Taxa
Taxonomic rank
Terminology
Types
Zoology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The PhyloCode suggests that by adopting its rules, taxonomists will gain clarity, uniqueness and stability compared with the use of Linnaean Taxonomy. This claim is questioned here by suggesting (1) that replacing the Types of Linnaean Taxonomy with the Specifiers of PhyloCode increases the complexity of decisions which have to be made, some of which go beyond nomenclature; (2) deciding which PhyloCode definition of a name to use demands knowledge of phylogenetic support and likelihood of future changes in ideas of relationships; (3) Phylogenetic Nomenclature will have limited value because it names only monophyletic groups, and (4) confusion over naming taxa is not avoided by the PhyloCode and can lead to problems when used alongside Linnaean Taxonomy. The problems concerning Linnaean rank and raised by Phylogenetic Nomenclature are upheld.
ISSN:0040-0262
1996-8175
DOI:10.2307/1554962