Taxonomy (biology): Difference between revisions
Reverted 2 edits by 72.71.162.118 to last version by Curtis Clark (HG) |
m →Modern system of classification: rephrased the extremely obscure word "desideratum" to make the sentence's meaning accessible to non-wonks (and/or way more of the world's ESL population). :-) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}} |
|||
{{for|the science of classifying living things|alpha taxonomy}} |
|||
{{short description|Science of naming, defining and classifying organisms}} |
|||
{{wiktionarypar|taxonomy}} |
|||
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2022}} |
|||
'''Taxonomy''' is the practice and science of classification. The word finds its roots in the [[Greek language|Greek]] ''{{Polytonic|τάξις}}'', ''taxis'' (meaning 'order', 'arrangement') and ''{{Polytonic|νόμος}}'', ''nomos'' ('law' or 'science'). Taxonomy uses taxonomic units, known as '''taxa''' (singular [[taxon]]). |
|||
{{good article}} |
|||
{{Evolutionary biology}} |
|||
In [[biology]], '''taxonomy''' ({{ety|grc|''[[wikt:τάξις|τάξις]]'' ([[taxis]])|arrangement||''[[wikt:νόμος|-νομία]]'' ([[:wikt:-nomy|-nomia]])|[[Scientific method|method]]}}) is the [[science|scientific]] study of naming, defining ([[Circumscription (taxonomy)|circumscribing]]) and classifying groups of biological [[organism]]s based on shared characteristics. Organisms are grouped into [[taxon|taxa]] (singular: taxon) and these groups are given a [[taxonomic rank]]; groups of a given rank can be aggregated to form a more inclusive group of higher rank, thus creating a taxonomic hierarchy. The principal ranks in modern use are [[domain (biology)|domain]], [[kingdom (biology)|kingdom]], [[phylum]] (''division'' is sometimes used in botany in place of ''phylum''), [[class (biology)|class]], [[order (biology)|order]], [[family (biology)|family]], [[genus]], and [[species]]. The Swedish botanist [[Carl Linnaeus]] is regarded as the founder of the current system of taxonomy, as he developed a ranked system known as [[Linnaean taxonomy]] for categorizing organisms and [[binomial nomenclature]] for naming organisms. |
|||
With advances in the theory, data and analytical technology of biological systematics, the Linnaean system has transformed into a system of modern biological classification intended to reflect the [[evolution]]ary relationships among organisms, both living and extinct. |
|||
In addition, the word is also used as a [[count noun]]: '''a taxonomy''', or taxonomic scheme, is a particular classification ("the taxonomy of ..."), arranged in a [[hierarchical]] structure. Typically this is organised by subtype-supertype relationships, also called parent-child relationships. In such a subtype-supertype relationship the subtype kind of thing has by definition the same constraints as the supertype kind of thing plus one or more additional constraints. For example, car is a subtype of [[vehicle]]. So any car is also a vehicle, but not every vehicle is a car. Therefore, a thing needs to satisfy more constraints to be a car than to be a vehicle. |
|||
== |
== Definition == |
||
The exact definition of taxonomy varies from source to source, but the core of the discipline remains: the conception, naming, and classification of groups of organisms.<ref name="Wilkins2011">{{Cite web |url= http://evolvingthoughts.net/2011/02/what-is-systematics-and-what-is-taxonomy/ |title=What is systematics and what is taxonomy? |last=Wilkins |first=J. S. |date=5 February 2011 |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160827124330/http://evolvingthoughts.net/2011/02/what-is-systematics-and-what-is-taxonomy/ |archive-date=27 August 2016 |access-date=21 August 2016}}</ref> As points of reference, recent definitions of taxonomy are presented below: |
|||
Originally the term taxonomy referred only to the classifying of organisms (now sometimes known as [[alpha taxonomy]]) or a particular classification of organisms. However, it has become fashionable in certain circles to apply the term in a wider, more general sense, where it may refer to a classification of '''things''' or '''concepts''', as well as to the ''principles'' underlying such a classification. |
|||
# Theory and practice of grouping individuals into species, arranging species into larger groups, and giving those groups names, thus producing a classification.<ref name="Judd">{{Cite book |title=Plant Systematics: A Phylogenetic Approach |last1=Judd |first1=W. S. |last2=Campbell |first2=C. S. |last3=Kellogg |first3=E. A. |last4=Stevens |first4=P. F. |last5=Donoghue |first5=M. J. |date=2007 |publisher=Sinauer Associates |edition=3rd |location=Sunderland |chapter=Taxonomy}}</ref> |
|||
Almost anything — animate objects, inanimate objects, places, concepts, events, properties, and relationships — may then be classified according to some taxonomic scheme. Wikipedia categories illustrate a taxonomy [[schema]].<ref>Zirn, Cäcilia, Vivi Nastase and Michael Strube. [http://www.eswc2008.org/final-pdfs-for-web-site/onl-4.pdf "Distinguishing Between Instances and Classes in the Wikipedia Taxonomy" (paper);] [http://videolectures.net/eswc08_zirn_dbi/ (video lecture).] 5th Annual [[European Semantic Web Conference]] (ESWC 2008).</ref> |
|||
# A field of science (and a major component of [[systematics]]) that encompasses description, identification, [[nomenclature]], and classification<ref name="Simpson">{{Cite book |title=Plant Systematics |last=Simpson |first=Michael G. |date=2010 |publisher=Academic Press |isbn=9780123743800 |edition=2nd |chapter=Chapter 1 Plant Systematics: an Overview}}</ref> |
|||
# The science of classification, in biology the arrangement of organisms into a classification<ref>{{cite book |editor-last1=Kirk |editor-first1=P. M. |editor-last2=Cannon |editor-first2=P. F. |editor-last3=Minter |editor-first3=D. W. |editor-last4=Stalpers |editor-first4=J. A. |date=2008 |chapter=Taxonomy |title=Dictionary of the Fungi |edition=10th |publisher=CABI}}</ref> |
|||
# "The science of classification as applied to living organisms, including the study of means of formation of species, etc."<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Wordsworth Dictionary of Science and Technology |date=1988 |publisher=W. R. Chambers Ltd. and Cambridge University Press |editor-last=Walker |editor-first=P. M. B.}}</ref> |
|||
# "The analysis of an organism's characteristics for the purpose of classification"<ref name="Henderson">{{Cite book |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=-PLgy6DWe0wC |title=Henderson's Dictionary Of Biology |last=Lawrence |first=E. |date=2005 |publisher=Pearson/Prentice Hall |isbn=9780131273849}}</ref> |
|||
# "Systematics studies [[phylogeny]] to provide a pattern that can be translated into the classification and names of the more inclusive field of taxonomy" (listed as a desirable but unusual definition)<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Wheeler |first=Quentin D. |title=Taxonomic triage and the poverty of phylogeny |date=2004 |journal=[[Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society]] |editor1-first=H. C. J. |editor1-last=Godfray |editor2-first=S. |editor2-last=Knapp |volume=359: Taxonomy for the twenty-first century |pages=571–583 |doi=10.1098/rstb.2003.1452 |pmc=1693342 |pmid=15253345 |author-link=Quentin D. Wheeler |issue=1444| issn = 0962-8436}}</ref> |
|||
The varied definitions either place taxonomy as a sub-area of systematics (definition 2), invert that relationship (definition 6), or appear to consider the two terms synonymous. There is some disagreement as to whether [[biological nomenclature]] is considered a part of taxonomy (definitions 1 and 2), or a part of systematics outside taxonomy.<ref name="Herbarium">{{Cite web |title=Nomenclature, Names, and Taxonomy |url= http://herbarium.usu.edu:80/teaching/4420/botnom.htm |date=2005 |website=Intermountain Herbarium |publisher=Utah State University |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20161123030604/http://herbarium.usu.edu/teaching/4420/botnom.htm |archive-date=23 November 2016}}</ref><ref name="Laurin 2023 Advent">{{cite book |last1=Laurin |first1=Michel |title=The Advent of PhyloCode: The Continuing Evolution of Biological Nomenclature |date=3 August 2023 |publisher=CRC Press |location=Boca Raton, Florida |isbn=9781003092827 |pages=xv + 209 |doi=10.1201/9781003092827 |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.1201/9781003092827/advent-phylocode-michel-laurin |access-date=19 September 2023 |archive-date=5 September 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230905140719/https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.1201/9781003092827/advent-phylocode-michel-laurin |url-status=live }}</ref> For example, definition 6 is paired with the following definition of systematics that places nomenclature outside taxonomy:<ref name="Henderson" /> |
|||
In an even wider sense, the term taxonomy could also be applied to relationship schemes other than parent-child hierarchies, such as [[Network (mathematics)|network structure]]s with other types of relationships. Taxonomies may then include single children with multi-parents, for example, "Car" might appear with both parents "Vehicle" and "Steel Mechanisms"; to some however, this merely means that 'car' is a part of several different taxonomies.<ref>Jackson, Joab. [http://www.gcn.com/print/23_3/24814-1.html?topic=interview&page=2 "Taxonomy’s not just design, it’s an art,"] ''Government Computer News'' (Washington, D.C.). September 2, 2004.</ref> A taxonomy might also be a simple organization of kinds of things into groups, or even an alphabetical list. However, the term vocabulary is more appropriate for such a list. In current usage within "[[Knowledge Management]]", taxonomies are seen as less broad than [[ontology (computer science)|ontologies]] as ontologies apply a larger variety of relation types.<ref>Suryanto, Hendra and Paul Compton. [http://ol2000.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/final/HSuryanto_5.pdf "Learning classification taxonomies from a classification knowledge based system."] [[University of Karlsruhe]]; [http://www.greenchameleon.com/gc/blog_detail/defining_taxonomy/ "Defining 'Taxonomy',"] Straights Knowledge website.</ref> |
|||
* ''Systematics'': "The study of the identification, taxonomy, and nomenclature of organisms, including the classification of living things with regard to their natural relationships and the study of variation and the evolution of taxa". |
|||
In 1970, Michener ''et al.'' defined "systematic biology" and "taxonomy" (terms that are often confused and used interchangeably) in relation to one another as follows:<ref>{{cite book |last1=Michener |first1=Charles D. |first2=John O. |last2=Corliss |first3=Richard S. |last3=Cowan |first4=Peter H. |last4=Raven |first5=Curtis W. |last5=Sabrosky |first6=Donald S. |last6=Squires |first7=G. W. |last7=Wharton |date=1970 |title=Systematics In Support of Biological Research |publisher=Division of Biology and Agriculture, National Research Council |location=Washington, DC}}</ref> |
|||
Mathematically, a hierarchical taxonomy is a [[tree structure]] of classifications for a given set of objects. It is also named [[Containment hierarchy]]. At the top of this structure is a single classification, the root node, that applies to all objects. Nodes below this root are more specific classifications that apply to subsets of the total set of classified objects. The progress of reasoning proceeds from the general to the more specific. In scientific taxonomies, a conflative term is always a [[polyseme]].<ref>Malone, Joseph L. (1988). [http://books.google.com/books?id=PEY0U3umLRkC&pg=PA112&dq=conflation&client=firefox-a ''The Science of Linguistics in the Art of Translation: Some Tools from Linguistics for the Analysis and Practice of Translation,'' p. 112.]</ref> |
|||
<blockquote> |
|||
Systematic biology (hereafter called simply systematics) is the field that (a) provides scientific names for organisms, (b) describes them, (c) preserves collections of them, (d) provides classifications for the organisms, keys for their identification, and data on their distributions, (e) investigates their evolutionary histories, and (f) considers their environmental adaptations. This is a field with a long history that in recent years has experienced a notable renaissance, principally with respect to theoretical content. Part of the theoretical material has to do with evolutionary areas (topics e and f above), the rest relates especially to the problem of classification. Taxonomy is that part of Systematics concerned with topics (a) to (d) above. |
|||
</blockquote> |
|||
A whole set of terms including taxonomy, systematic biology, [[systematics]], scientific classification, biological classification, and [[phylogenetics]] have at times had overlapping meanings – sometimes the same, sometimes slightly different, but always related and intersecting.<ref name="Wilkins2011" /><ref name="Small1989">{{Cite journal |last=Small |first=Ernest |date=1989 |title=Systematics of Biological Systematics (Or, Taxonomy of Taxonomy) |journal=Taxon |volume=38 |issue=3 |pages=335–356 |doi=10.2307/1222265 |jstor=1222265}}</ref> The broadest meaning of "taxonomy" is used here. The term itself was introduced in 1813 by [[Augustin Pyramus de Candolle|de Candolle]], in his ''[[Théorie élémentaire de la botanique]]''.<ref>{{Cite book |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=In_Lv8iMt24C&pg=PA20 |title=Plant systematics: An integrated approach |last=Singh |first=Gurcharan |date=2004 |publisher=Science Publishers |isbn=9781578083510 |page=20 |via=Google Books}}</ref> [[John Lindley]] provided an early definition of systematics in 1830, although he wrote of "systematic botany" rather than using the term "systematics".<ref>{{cite web |last=Wilkins |first=J. S. |url= http://evolvingthoughts.net/2011/02/what-is-systematics-and-what-is-taxonomy/ |title=What is systematics and what is taxonomy? |work=EvolvingThoughts.net |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160827124330/http://evolvingthoughts.net/2011/02/what-is-systematics-and-what-is-taxonomy/ |archive-date=27 August 2016}}</ref> Europeans tend to use the terms "systematics" and "biosystematics" for the study of biodiversity as a whole, whereas North Americans tend to use "taxonomy" more frequently.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Brusca |first1=R. C. |last2=Brusca |first2=G. J. |date=2003 |title=Invertebrates |edition=2nd |location=Sunderland, Massachusetts |publisher=Sinauer Associates |page=27}}</ref> However, taxonomy, and in particular [[alpha taxonomy]], is more specifically the identification, description, and naming (i.e., nomenclature) of organisms,<ref name="Fortey">{{Cite book |last=Fortey |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Fortey |date=2008 |title=Dry Store Room No. 1: The Secret Life of the Natural History Museum |location=London |publisher=Harper Perennial |isbn=9780007209897}}</ref> while "classification" focuses on placing organisms within hierarchical groups that show their relationships to other organisms. |
|||
In contrast, in a context of legal terminology, an open-ended contextual taxonomy—a taxonomy holding only with respect to a specific context. In scenarios taken from the legal domain, a formal account of the open-texture of legal terms is modeled, which suggests varying notions of the "core" and "penumbra" of the meanings of a concept. The progress of reasoning proceeds form the specific to the more general.<ref>Grossi, Davide, Frank Dignum and John-Jules Charles Meyer. (2005). [http://www.springerlink.com/content/9yj2lfa5cy67c78m/fulltext.pdf?page=1 "Contextual Taxonomies" in ''Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems,'' pp. 33-51].</ref> |
|||
=== Monograph and taxonomic revision === |
|||
==Taxonomy and mental classification== |
|||
A '''taxonomic revision''' or '''taxonomic review''' is a novel analysis of the variation patterns in a particular [[taxon]]. This analysis may be executed on the basis of any combination of the various available kinds of characters, such as morphological, [[anatomical]], [[palynological]], [[Biochemistry|biochemical]] and [[Genetics|genetic]]. A [[Monograph#In biology|monograph]] or complete revision is a revision that is comprehensive for a taxon for the information given at a particular time, and for the entire world. Other (partial) revisions may be restricted in the sense that they may only use some of the available character sets or have a limited spatial scope. A revision results in a conformation of or new insights in the relationships between the subtaxa within the taxon under study, which may lead to a change in the classification of these subtaxa, the identification of new subtaxa, or the merger of previous subtaxa.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Maxted |first=Nigel |date=1992 |title=Towards Defining a Taxonomic Revision Methodology |journal=Taxon |volume=41 |issue=4 |pages=653–660 |doi=10.2307/1222391 |jstor=1222391}}</ref> |
|||
Some have argued that the adult human mind naturally organizes its knowledge of the world into such systems. This view is often based on the [[epistemology]] of [[Immanuel Kant]]. |
|||
[[cultural anthropology|Anthropologists]] have observed that taxonomies are generally embedded in local cultural and social systems, and serve various social functions. Perhaps the most well-known and influential study of folk taxonomies is [[Émile Durkheim]]'s ''The Elementary Forms of Religious Life''. |
|||
== |
=== Taxonomic characters === |
||
Taxonomic characters are the taxonomic attributes that can be used to provide the evidence from which relationships (the [[phylogeny]]) between taxa are inferred.<ref name="Hennig 1965">{{cite journal |last1=Hennig |first1=Willi |title=Phylogenetic Systematics |journal=Annual Review of Entomology |date=January 1965 |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=97–116 |doi=10.1146/annurev.en.10.010165.000525 |url=https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.10.010165.000525 |issn=0066-4170 |access-date=19 September 2023 |archive-date=13 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231113101423/https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.en.10.010165.000525 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Mayr |first=Ernst |author-link=Ernst Mayr |date=1991 |title=Principles of Systematic Zoology |location=New York |publisher=McGraw-Hill |page=159}}</ref> Kinds of taxonomic characters include:<ref>Mayr, Ernst (1991), p. 162.</ref> |
|||
[[Biological classification]] (sometimes known as "[[Linnaean taxonomy]]") is still generally the best known form of taxonomy. It uses taxonomic ranks, including, among others, (in order) Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species (various mnemonic devices have been used to help people remember the list of "Linnaean" taxonomic ranks. See [[Zoology mnemonic]]). In zoology, the nomenclature for the more important ranks ([[Taxonomic rank|superfamily]] to [[subspecies]]), including the allowed number of ranks, is strictly regulated by the ''[[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature|ICZN Code]]'', whereas there is more latitude for names at higher ranks. Taxonomy itself is never regulated, but is always the result of research in the scientific community. How researchers arrive at their [[taxon|taxa]] varies; depending on the available data, and resources, methods vary from simple [[quantitative]] or [[qualitative]] comparisons of striking features to elaborate computer analyses of large amounts of [[DNA sequence]] data. |
|||
{{div col|colwidth=35em}} |
|||
* [[Morphology (biology)|Morphological]] characters |
|||
** General external [[Morphology (biology)|morphology]] |
|||
** Special structures (e.g., [[Sex organ|genitalia]]) |
|||
** Internal morphology ([[anatomy]]) |
|||
** [[Embryology]] |
|||
** [[Karyotype|Karyology]] and other [[Cell biology|cytological]] factors |
|||
* [[Physiology|Physiological]] characters |
|||
** [[Metabolism|Metabolic factors]] |
|||
** Body secretions |
|||
** Genic sterility factors |
|||
* [[Molecular biology|Molecular]] characters |
|||
** Immunological distance |
|||
** Electrophoretic differences |
|||
** Amino acid sequences of proteins |
|||
** DNA hybridization |
|||
** DNA and RNA sequences |
|||
** Restriction endonuclease analyses |
|||
** Other molecular differences |
|||
* [[Behavior|Behavioral]] characters |
|||
** Courtship and other ethological isolating mechanisms |
|||
** Other behavior patterns |
|||
* [[Ecology|Ecological]] characters |
|||
** Habit and habitats |
|||
** Food |
|||
** Seasonal variations |
|||
** Parasites and hosts |
|||
* [[Geography|Geographic]] characters |
|||
** General [[Species distribution|biogeographic distribution]] patterns |
|||
** [[Sympatry|Sympatric]]-[[Allopatric speciation|allopatric]] relationship of populations |
|||
{{div col end}} |
|||
=== |
=== Alpha and beta taxonomy === |
||
{{distinguish|Alpha diversity}} |
|||
Today, the alternative to the traditional rank-based biological classification is phylogenetic systematics, which is postulating [[phylogenetic tree]]s (trees of descent), rather than focusing on what taxa to delimit. The best-known form of this is [[cladistics]]. |
|||
The term "'''alpha taxonomy'''" is primarily used to refer to the discipline of finding, describing, and naming [[taxon|taxa]], particularly species.<ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> In earlier literature, the term had a different meaning, referring to morphological taxonomy, and the products of research through the end of the 19th century.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rosselló-Mora |first1=Ramon |last2=Amann |first2=Rudolf |date=1 January 2001 |title=The species concept for prokaryotes |journal=FEMS Microbiology Reviews |volume=25 |issue=1 |pages=39–67 |doi=10.1111/j.1574-6976.2001.tb00571.x |issn=1574-6976 |pmid=11152940|doi-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
[[William Bertram Turrill]] introduced the term "alpha taxonomy" in a series of papers published in 1935 and 1937 in which he discussed the philosophy and possible future directions of the discipline of taxonomy.{{sfn|Turrill|1938}}<blockquote> ... there is an increasing desire amongst taxonomists to consider their problems from wider viewpoints, to investigate the possibilities of closer co-operation with their cytological, ecological and genetics colleagues and to acknowledge that some revision or expansion, perhaps of a drastic nature, of their aims and methods, may be desirable ... Turrill (1935) has suggested that while accepting the older invaluable taxonomy, based on structure, and conveniently designated "alpha", it is possible to glimpse a far-distant taxonomy built upon as wide a basis of morphological and physiological facts as possible, and one in which "place is found for all observational and experimental data relating, even if indirectly, to the constitution, subdivision, origin, and behaviour of species and other taxonomic groups". Ideals can, it may be said, never be completely realized. They have, however, a great value of acting as permanent stimulants, and if we have some, even vague, ideal of an "omega" taxonomy we may progress a little way down the Greek alphabet. Some of us please ourselves by thinking we are now groping in a "beta" taxonomy.{{sfn|Turrill|1938}}</blockquote> |
|||
The results of cladistic analyses are often represented as cladograms. It is held by cladists that taxa (if recognized) must always correspond to [[clade]]s, united by [[apomorph]]ies (derived traits) which are discovered by a cladistic analysis. Some cladists{{Who|date=May 2009}} hold that clades are poorly expressed in rank-based hierarchies and support the ''[[PhyloCode]]'', a proposed ruleswork for the formal naming of clades, based on the model of the ''ICZN'', ''[[ICBN]]'' etc. in rank-based nomenclature. |
|||
Turrill thus explicitly excludes from alpha taxonomy various areas of study that he includes within taxonomy as a whole, such as ecology, physiology, genetics, and cytology. He further excludes phylogenetic reconstruction from alpha taxonomy.{{sfn|Turrill|1938|pp=365–366}} |
|||
=== Numerical taxonomy === |
|||
In [[numerical taxonomy]], numerical phenetics or taximetrics, the taxonomy is exclusively based on [[cluster analysis]] and [[neighbor joining]] to best-fit numerical equations that characterize measurable traits of a number of organisms. It results in a measure of evolutionary "distance" between species. This method has been largely superseded by cladistic analyses today; it is liable to being misled by [[plesiomorph]]ic traits. |
|||
Later authors have used the term in a different sense, to mean the delimitation of species (not subspecies or taxa of other ranks), using whatever investigative techniques are available, and including sophisticated computational or laboratory techniques.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Steyskal |first=G. C. |date=1965 |title=Trend curves of the rate of species description in zoology |journal=Science |volume=149 |issue=3686 |pages=880–882 |bibcode=1965Sci...149..880S |doi=10.1126/science.149.3686.880 |pmid=17737388|s2cid=36277653}}</ref><ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> Thus, [[Ernst Mayr]] in 1968 defined "'''beta taxonomy'''" as the classification of ranks higher than species.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Mayr |first=Ernst |title=The Role of Systematics in Biology: The study of all aspects of the diversity of life is one of the most important concerns in biology |date=9 February 1968 |journal=Science |volume=159 |issue=3815 |pages=595–599 |bibcode=1968Sci...159..595M |doi=10.1126/science.159.3815.595 |pmid=4886900 |author-link=Ernst Mayr}}</ref><blockquote>An understanding of the biological meaning of variation and of the evolutionary origin of groups of related species is even more important for the second stage of taxonomic activity, the sorting of species into groups of relatives ("taxa") and their arrangement in a hierarchy of higher categories. This activity is what the term classification denotes; it is also referred to as "beta taxonomy".</blockquote> |
|||
==Non-scientific taxonomies== |
|||
Other taxonomies, such as those analyzed by [[Durkheim]] and [[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss]], are sometimes called [[Folk taxonomy|folk taxonomies]] to distinguish them from scientific taxonomies that focus on [[evolution]]ary relationships rather than similarity in [[habitus]] and habits. Though phenetics arguably places much emphasis on overall similarity, it is a quantitative analysis that attempts to reproduce evolutionary relationships of lineages and not similarities of [[form taxa]]. |
|||
=== Microtaxonomy and macrotaxonomy === |
|||
The [[neologism]] [[folksonomy]] should not be confused with "folk taxonomy", though it is obviously a [[portmanteau]] created from the two words. "Fauxonomy" (from French ''faux'', "false") is a [[pejorative]] [[neologism]] used to criticize folk taxonomies for their lack of agreement with scientific findings. [[Baraminology]] is a taxonomy used in [[creation science]] which in classifying form taxa resembles folk taxonomies. |
|||
{{Main|Species problem}} |
|||
How species should be defined in a particular group of organisms gives rise to practical and theoretical problems that are referred to as the [[species problem]]. The scientific work of deciding how to define species has been called microtaxonomy.<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance |last=Mayr |first=Ernst |date=1982 |publisher=Belknap Press of Harvard University Press |isbn=9780674364462 |chapter=Chapter 6: Microtaxonomy, the science of species |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pHThtE2R0UQC |access-date=15 September 2017 |archive-date=3 July 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230703072557/https://books.google.com/books?id=pHThtE2R0UQC |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.biological-concepts.com/views/search.php?term=1508 |title=Result of Your Query |website=biological-concepts.com |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405170414/http://www.biological-concepts.com/views/search.php?term=1508 |archive-date=5 April 2017}}</ref><ref name="BiologyDiscussion">{{Cite news |url= http://www.biologydiscussion.com/animals-2/taxonomy/taxonomy-meaning-levels-periods-and-role/32373 |title=Taxonomy: Meaning, Levels, Periods and Role |date=27 May 2016 |work=Biology Discussion |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405073645/http://www.biologydiscussion.com/animals-2/taxonomy/taxonomy-meaning-levels-periods-and-role/32373 |archive-date=5 April 2017}}</ref> By extension, macrotaxonomy is the study of groups at the higher [[taxonomic rank]]s subgenus and above,<ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> or simply in clades that include more than one taxon considered a species, expressed in terms of [[phylogenetic nomenclature]].<ref name="Cantino & de Queiroz 2020">{{cite book |last1=Cantino |first1=Philip D. |last2=de Queiroz |first2=Kevin |title=International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature (PhyloCode): A Phylogenetic Code of Biological Nomenclature |date=29 April 2020 |publisher=CRC Press |location=Boca Raton, Florida |isbn=978-0429821356 |pages=xl + 149 |url=https://www.routledge.com/International-Code-of-Phylogenetic-Nomenclature-PhyloCode/Queiroz-Cantino/p/book/9781138332829 |access-date=19 September 2023 |archive-date=14 October 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231014042402/https://www.routledge.com/International-Code-of-Phylogenetic-Nomenclature-PhyloCode/Queiroz-Cantino/p/book/9781138332829 |url-status=live }}</ref> |
|||
== History == |
|||
The phrase "[[enterprise taxonomy]]" is used in business to describe a very limited form of taxonomy used only within one organization. An example would be a certain method of classifying trees as "Type A", "Type B" and "Type C" used only by a certain lumber company for categorising log shipments. |
|||
While some descriptions of taxonomic history attempt to date taxonomy to ancient civilizations, a truly scientific attempt to classify organisms did not occur until the 18th century, with the possible exception of Aristotle, whose works hint at a taxonomy.<ref name="Voultsiadou & Vafidis 2007">{{cite journal |last1=Voultsiadou |first1=Eleni |last2=Vafidis |first2=Dimitris |title=Marine invertebrate diversity in Aristotle's zoology |journal=Contributions to Zoology |date=1 January 2007 |volume=76 |issue=2 |pages=103–120 |doi=10.1163/18759866-07602004 |url=https://doi.org/10.1163/18759866-07602004 |issn=1875-9866 |access-date=19 September 2023 |archive-date=25 April 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230425063507/https://brill.com/view/journals/ctoz/76/2/article-p103_4.xml |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Voultsiadou et al. 2017">{{cite journal |last1=Voultsiadou |first1=Eleni |last2=Gerovasileiou |first2=Vasilis |last3=Vandepitte |first3=Leen |last4=Ganias |first4=Kostas |last5=Arvanitidis |first5=Christos |title=Aristotle's scientific contributions to the classification, nomenclature and distribution of marine organisms |journal=Mediterranean Marine Science |date=2017 |volume=18 |issue=3 |pages=468–478 |doi=10.12681/mms.13874 |issn=1791-6763 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Earlier works were primarily descriptive and focused on plants that were useful in agriculture or medicine. |
|||
There are a number of stages in this scientific thinking. Early taxonomy was based on arbitrary criteria, the so-called "artificial systems", including [[Carl Linnaeus|Linnaeus]]'s system of sexual classification for plants (Linnaeus's 1735 classification of animals was entitled "[[Systema Naturae]]" ("the System of Nature"), implying that he, at least, believed that it was more than an "artificial system"). |
|||
==Military taxonomy== |
|||
Military theorist [[Carl von Clausewitz]] stressed the significance of grasping the fundamentals of any situation in the "blink of an eye" ([[Coup d'œil|''coup d'œil'']]). In a military context, the astute tactician can immediately grasp a range of implications and can begin to anticipate plausible and appropriate courses of action.<ref>Calusewitz, Carl. (1982). [http://books.google.com/books?id=_La4qTgECD0C&pg=PA141&lpg=PA141&dq=clausewitz+coup+d%27oeil&source=web&ots=8UCKTI28o4&sig=0ntr9cQoagmpsJVuulXii533H8U&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=10&ct=result ''On War,'' p. 141;] [http://www.greenchameleon.com/gc/blog_detail/defining_taxonomy/ "Defining 'Taxonomy',"] Straights Knowledge website.</ref> Clausewitz' conceptual "blink" represents a tentative [[ontology]] which organizes a set of concepts within a [[Domain of discourse|domain]].{{Weasel|date=March 2009}} |
|||
Later came systems based on a more complete consideration of the characteristics of taxa, referred to as "natural systems", such as those of [[Antoine Laurent de Jussieu|de Jussieu]] (1789), de Candolle (1813) and [[Bentham and Hooker]] (1862–1863). These classifications described empirical patterns and were pre-[[evolution]]ary in thinking. |
|||
The term "[[military taxonomy]]" encompasses the domains of weapons, equipment, organizations, strategies, and tactics.<ref name="cycorp2">Cycorp: [http://www.cyc.com/products/overview Structured information]</ref> The use of taxonomies in the military extends beyond its value as an indexing tool or record-keeping template<ref>Fenske, Russell W. [http://www.jstor.org/pss/168881 "A Taxonomy for Operations Research,"] ''Operations Research,'' Vol. 19, No. 1 (Jan.-Feb., 1971), pp. 224-234;] United Nations. [http://archives.un.org/unarms/doc/taxonomy/20060609_Taxonomy_-_Version_1.pdf "Taxonomy for Recordkeeping in Field Missions of UN Peacekeeping Operations."] June 2006. </ref> -- for example, the taxonomy-model analysis suggests a useful depiction of the spectrum of the use of military force in a political context. <ref>Cohen, Stuart A. and Efraim Inbar. [http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a782379359~db=all~order=page "A taxonomy of Israel's use of military force,"] ''Journal Comparative Strategy,'' Vol. 10, No. 2 (April 1991), pp. 121 - 138.</ref> |
|||
The publication of [[Charles Darwin]]'s ''[[On the Origin of Species]]'' (1859) led to a new explanation for classifications, based on evolutionary relationships. This was the concept of [[phyletic]] systems, from 1883 onwards. This approach was typified by those of [[August Eichler|Eichler]] (1883) and [[Adolf Engler|Engler]] (1886–1892). |
|||
A taxonomy of terms to describe various types of military operations is fundamentally affected by the way all elements are defined and addressed—not unlike [[framing (social sciences)|framing]]. For example, in terms of a specific military operation, a taxonomic approach based on differentiation and categorization of the entities participating would produce results which were quite different from an approach based on functional objective of an operation (such as peacekeeping, disaster relief, or counter-terrorism).<ref>Downie, Richard D. [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KNN/is_38/ai_n15631260/pg_3?tag=artBody;col1 "Defining integrated operations,"] ''Joint Force Quarterly'' (Washington, D.C.). July, 2005.</ref> |
|||
The advent of [[cladistic]] methodology in the 1970s led to classifications based on the sole criterion of [[monophyly]], supported by the presence of [[synapomorphies]]. Since then, the evidentiary basis has been expanded with data from [[molecular genetics]] that for the most part complements traditional [[Morphology (biology)|morphology]].{{sfn|Datta|1988}}{{page needed|date=July 2019}}{{sfn|Stace|1989}}{{page needed|date=July 2019}}{{sfn|Stuessy|2009}}{{page needed|date=July 2019}} |
|||
==Notes== |
|||
{{reflist|2}} |
|||
=== Pre-Linnaean === |
|||
==References==<!-- Zootaxa1407:3,1519:27,1671:1,1787:28. --> |
|||
* Carbonell, J. G. and J. Siekmann, eds. (2005). [http://www.springerlink.com/content/fb5lq38pu0c7/?p=55d6f2e6622046f5909b8b3d31994ddb&pi=0 ''Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems,'' Vol. 3487.] Berlin: [[Springer-Verlag]]. 13-ISBN 978-3-540-28060-6 |
|||
* Clausewitz, Carl. (1982). [http://books.google.com/books?id=_La4qTgECD0C&dq=clausewitz+coup+d%27oeil&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0 ''On War''] (editor, Anatol Rapoport). New York: [[Penguin Classics]]. 10-ISBN 0-140-44427-0; 13-ISBN 978-0-140-44427-8 |
|||
* Malone, Joseph L. (1988). [http://books.google.com/books?id=PEY0U3umLRkC&client=firefox-a ''The Science of Linguistics in the Art of Translation: Some Tools from Linguistics for the Analysis and Practice of Translation.''] Albany, New York: [[State University of New York Press]]. 10-ISBN 0-887-06653-4; 13-ISBN 978-0-887-06653-5; [http://www.worldcat.org/wcpa/oclc/15856738 OCLC 15856738] |
|||
==== Early taxonomists ==== |
|||
==See also== |
|||
Naming and classifying human surroundings likely began with the onset of language. Distinguishing poisonous plants from edible plants is integral to the survival of human communities. Medicinal plant illustrations show up in Egyptian wall paintings from {{Circa|1500 BC}}, indicating that the uses of different species were understood and that a basic taxonomy was in place.<ref name="Manktelow">{{cite web |last=Manktelow |first=M. |date=2010 |url= http://atbi.eu/summerschool/files/summerschool/Manktelow_Syllabus.pdf |title=History of Taxonomy |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150529020546/http://atbi.eu/summerschool/files/summerschool/Manktelow_Syllabus.pdf |archive-date=29 May 2015 |publisher=Dept. of Systematic Biology, [[Uppsala University]]}}</ref> |
|||
* [[Bloom's Taxonomy]] |
|||
* [[Carolus Linnaeus]], the father of systematics |
|||
==== Ancient times ==== |
|||
* [[Categorization]] |
|||
* [[Capital Market Taxonomy]] |
|||
{{further|Aristotle's biology#Classification}} |
|||
* [[Conflation]] |
|||
* [[Cultigen taxonomy]] |
|||
[[File:Huang-Quan-Xie-sheng-zhen-qin-tu.jpg|thumb|upright=1.7|''Description of rare animals'' (写生珍禽图), by [[Song dynasty]] painter [[Huang Quan (painter)|Huang Quan]] (903–965)]] |
|||
* [[Cultivated plant taxonomy]] |
|||
* [[Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Recognition]], a fictional Chinese encyclopedia with an "impossible" taxonomic scheme. |
|||
Organisms were first classified by [[Aristotle]] ([[Greece]], 384–322 BC) during his stay on the [[Lesbos|Island of Lesbos]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Mayr |first=Ernst |author-link=Ernst Mayr |date=1982 |title=The Growth of Biological Thought |publisher=Belknap Press of Harvard University Press |location=Cambridge, Massachusetts}}</ref><ref name="Palaeos">{{Cite web |url= http://palaeos.com/taxonomy/history.html |title= History of Taxonomy |website=Palaeos |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170331022648/http://palaeos.com/taxonomy/history.html |archive-date=31 March 2017}}</ref><ref name="Britannica – Taxonomy" /> He classified beings by their parts, or in modern terms ''attributes'', such as having live birth, having four legs, laying eggs, having blood, or being warm-bodied.<ref name="Roanoke">{{Cite web |url= http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/courses/genomics_course/roanoke/bio101ch20.htm |title=Biology 101, Ch 20 |date=23 March 1998 |website=cbs.dtu.dk |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170628023508/http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/courses/genomics_course/roanoke/bio101ch20.htm |archive-date=28 June 2017}}</ref> He divided all living things into two groups: [[plant]]s and [[animal]]s.<ref name="Palaeos" /> |
|||
* [[Chresonym]] |
|||
* [[Cladistics]], the most prominent of several forms of [[phylogenetic]] [[systematics]] |
|||
Some of his groups of animals, such as ''Anhaima'' (animals without blood, translated as [[invertebrate]]s) and ''Enhaima'' (animals with blood, roughly the [[vertebrate]]s), as well as groups like the [[shark]]s and [[cetacean]]s, are commonly used.<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Lagoon: How Aristotle Invented Science |title-link=Aristotle's Lagoon |last=Leroi |first=Armand Marie |date=2014 |publisher=Bloomsbury |isbn=9781408836224 |pages=384–395 |author-link=Armand Marie Leroi}}</ref><ref name="von Lieven & Humar 2008">{{cite journal |last1=von Lieven |first1=Alexander Fürst |last2=Humar |first2=Marcel |title=A Cladistic Analysis of Aristotle's Animal Groups in the "Historia animalium" |journal=History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences |date=2008 |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=227–262 |jstor=23334371 |pmid=19203017 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23334371 |issn=0391-9714 |access-date=19 September 2023 |archive-date=27 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221127081940/https://www.jstor.org/stable/23334371 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Laurin & Humar 2022">{{cite journal |last1=Laurin |first1=Michel |last2=Humar |first2=Marcel |title=Phylogenetic signal in characters from Aristotle's History of Animals |journal=Comptes Rendus Palevol |date=2022 |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=1–16 |doi=10.5852/cr-palevol2022v21a1 |language=fr |doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
* [[Folksonomy]] |
|||
* [[Gellish English dictionary]] / Taxonomy, in which the concepts are arranged as a subtype-supertype hierarchy. |
|||
His student [[Theophrastus]] (Greece, 370–285 BC) carried on this tradition, mentioning some 500 plants and their uses in his ''[[Historia Plantarum (Theophrastus)|Historia Plantarum]]''. Several plant [[Genus|genera]] can be traced back to Theophrastus, such as ''[[Cornus (genus)|Cornus]]'', ''[[Crocus]]'', and ''[[Narcissus (plant)|Narcissus]]''.<ref name="Palaeos" /> |
|||
* [[History of plant systematics]] |
|||
* [[Hypernym]] |
|||
==== Medieval ==== |
|||
Taxonomy in the [[Middle Ages]] was largely based on the [[Aristotelian system]],<ref name="Roanoke" /> with additions concerning the philosophical and existential order of creatures. This included concepts such as the [[great chain of being]] in the Western [[scholasticism|scholastic]] tradition,<ref name="Roanoke" /> again deriving ultimately from Aristotle. |
|||
The Aristotelian system did not classify plants or [[fungi]], due to the lack of microscopes at the time,<ref name="Britannica – Taxonomy" /> as his ideas were based on arranging the complete world in a single continuum, as per the ''scala naturae'' (the Natural Ladder).<ref name="Palaeos" /> This, as well, was taken into consideration in the great chain of being.<ref name="Palaeos" /> |
|||
Advances were made by scholars such as [[Procopius]], [[Timotheus of Gaza]], [[Demetrios Pepagomenos]], and [[Thomas Aquinas]]. Medieval thinkers used abstract philosophical and logical categorizations more suited to abstract philosophy than to pragmatic taxonomy.<ref name="Palaeos" /> |
|||
==== Renaissance and early modern ==== |
|||
During the [[Renaissance]] and the [[Age of Enlightenment]], categorizing organisms became more prevalent,<ref name="Palaeos" /> |
|||
and taxonomic works became ambitious enough to replace the ancient texts. This is sometimes credited to the development of sophisticated optical lenses, which allowed the morphology of organisms to be studied in much greater detail. |
|||
One of the earliest authors to take advantage of this leap in technology was the Italian physician [[Andrea Cesalpino]] (1519–1603), who has been called "the first taxonomist".<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/biography/Andrea-Cesalpino |title=Andrea Cesalpino {{!}} Italian physician, philosopher, and botanist |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405075220/https://www.britannica.com/biography/Andrea-Cesalpino |archive-date=5 April 2017 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> His [[Masterpiece|magnum opus]] ''De Plantis'' came out in 1583, and described more than 1,500 plant species.<ref>{{Cite book |url= https://archive.org/details/deplantislibrixv00cesa |title=De plantis libri XVI |last1=Cesalpino |first1=Andrea |last2=Marescotti |first2=Giorgio |date=1583 |publisher=Apud Georgium Marescottum |location=Florence |via=Internet Archive}}</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/biography/Andrea-Cesalpino#ref130098 |title=Andrea Cesalpino {{!}} Italian physician, philosopher, and botanist |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405075220/https://www.britannica.com/biography/Andrea-Cesalpino#ref130098 |archive-date=5 April 2017 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> Two large plant families that he first recognized are in use: the [[Asteraceae]] and [[Brassicaceae]].<ref>{{Cite book |title=International Edition Vegetables I: Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Chenopodicaceae, and Cucurbitaceae (Handbook of Plant Breeding) |last=Jaime |first=Prohens |date=2010 |publisher=Springer |isbn=9781441924742}}</ref> |
|||
In the 17th century, [[John Ray]] ([[England]], 1627–1705) wrote many important taxonomic works.<ref name="Britannica – Taxonomy">{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy |title=taxonomy {{!}} biology |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405075451/https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy |archive-date=5 April 2017 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> Arguably his greatest accomplishment was ''Methodus Plantarum Nova'' (1682),<ref>{{Cite book |last=John |first=Ray |url= https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/84226#page/7/mode/1up |title=Methodus plantarum nova |publisher=impensis Henrici Faithorne & Joannis Kersey, ad insigne Rofæ Coemeterio D. Pauli |date=1682 |language=la |trans-title=New Method of Plants |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170929060003/http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/84226#page/7/mode/1up |archive-date=29 September 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> in which he published details of over 18,000 plant species. At the time, his classifications were perhaps the most complex yet produced by any taxonomist, as he based his taxa on many combined characters. |
|||
The next major taxonomic works were produced by [[Joseph Pitton de Tournefort]] (France, 1656–1708).<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/biography/Joseph-Pitton-de-Tournefort |title=Joseph Pitton de Tournefort {{!}} French botanist and physician |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405075951/https://www.britannica.com/biography/Joseph-Pitton-de-Tournefort |archive-date=5 April 2017 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> His work from 1700, ''Institutiones Rei Herbariae'', included more than 9,000 species in 698 genera, which directly influenced Linnaeus, as it was the text he used as a young student.<ref name="Manktelow" /> |
|||
=== Linnaean era === |
|||
{{Main|Linnaean taxonomy}} |
|||
[[File:Linné-Systema Naturae 1735.jpg|thumb|upright|Title page of ''[[Systema Naturae]]'', Leiden, 1735]] |
|||
The Swedish botanist [[Carl Linnaeus]] (1707–1778)<ref name="Roanoke" /> ushered in a new era of taxonomy. With his major works ''[[Systema Naturae]]'' 1st Edition in 1735,<ref>{{cite book |last=Linnaeus |first=Carl |author-link=Carl Linnaeus |date=1735 |title=Systema naturae, sive regna tria naturae systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera, & species |language=la |publisher=Haak |location=Leiden}}</ref> ''[[Species Plantarum]]'' in 1753,<ref>{{cite book |last=Linnaeus |first=Carl |author-link=Carl Linnaeus |date=1753 |title=Species Plantarum |language=la |location=Stockholm}}</ref> and [[10th edition of Systema Naturae|''Systema Naturae'' 10th Edition]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Linnaeus |first=Carl |author-link=Carl Linnaeus |date=1758 |title=Systema naturae, sive regna tria naturae systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera, & species |edition=10th |language=la |publisher=Haak |location=Leiden}}</ref> he revolutionized modern taxonomy. His works implemented a standardized binomial naming system for animal and plant species,<ref name="Britannica – Linnaean">{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy/The-Linnaean-system |title=taxonomy – The Linnaean system {{!}} biology |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405074215/https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy/The-Linnaean-system |archive-date=5 April 2017 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> which proved to be an elegant solution to a chaotic and disorganized taxonomic literature. He not only introduced the standard of class, order, genus, and species, but also made it possible to identify plants and animals from his book, by using the smaller parts of the flower (known as the [[Linnaean system]]).<ref name="Britannica – Linnaean" /> |
|||
Plant and animal taxonomists regard Linnaeus' work as the "starting point" for valid names (at 1753 and 1758 respectively).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Donk |first=M. A. |date=December 1957 |title=Typification and later starting-points |url= http://www.iapt-taxon.org/historic/Congress/IBC_1959/Prop018-019.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Taxon |volume=6 |issue=9 |pages=245–256 |doi=10.2307/1217493 |jstor=1217493 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150518091529/http://www.iapt-taxon.org/historic/Congress/IBC_1959/Prop018-019.pdf |archive-date=18 May 2015}}</ref> Names published before these dates are referred to as "pre-Linnaean", and not considered valid (with the exception of spiders published in ''[[Svenska Spindlar]]''<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Carl |first1=Clerck |last2=Carl |first2=Bergquist |last3=Eric |first3=Borg |last4=L. |first4=Gottman |last5=Lars |first5=Salvius |url= https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/209583#page/7/mode/1up |title=Svenska spindlar |publisher=Literis Laur. Salvii |date=1757 |language=sv |trans-title=Swedish Spiders |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20171201181959/https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/209583#page/7/mode/1up |archive-date=1 December 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>). Even taxonomic names published by Linnaeus himself before these dates are considered pre-Linnaean.<ref name="Manktelow" /> |
|||
=== The digital era of taxonomy === |
|||
Modern taxonomy is heavily influenced by technology such as [[DNA sequencing]], [[bioinformatics]], [[Biological database|databases]], and [[imaging]]. |
|||
== Modern system of classification == |
|||
{{Main|Evolutionary taxonomy|Phylogenetic nomenclature}} |
|||
[[File:Spindle diagram.jpg|thumb|upright=1.25|Evolution of the [[vertebrates]] at class level, width of spindles indicating number of families. Spindle diagrams are typical for [[evolutionary taxonomy]].]] |
|||
[[File:Cladogram vertebrata.jpg|thumb|upright=1.25|The same relationship, expressed as a [[cladogram]] typical for [[cladistics]]]] |
|||
A pattern of groups nested within groups was specified by Linnaeus' classifications of plants and animals, and these patterns began to be represented as [[dendrograms]] of the animal and plant [[Kingdom (biology)|kingdoms]] toward the end of the 18th century, well before Charles Darwin's ''On the Origin of Species'' was published.<ref name="Britannica – Taxonomy" /> The pattern of the "Natural System" did not entail a generating process, such as evolution, but may have implied it, inspiring early transmutationist thinkers. Among early works exploring the idea of a [[transmutation of species]] were ''[[Zoonomia]]'' in 1796 by [[Erasmus Darwin]] (Charles Darwin's grandfather), and [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]]'s ''[[Philosophie zoologique]]'' of 1809.<ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> The idea was popularized in the Anglophone world by the speculative but widely read ''[[Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation]]'', published anonymously by [[Robert Chambers (publisher, born 1802)|Robert Chambers]] in 1844.<ref>{{Cite book |url= http://www.press.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/hfs.cgi/00/14098.ctl |title=Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation |last=Secord |first=James A. |date=2000 |publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] |isbn=9780226744100 |author-link=James A. Secord |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080516224806/http://www.press.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/hfs.cgi/00/14098.ctl |archive-date=16 May 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref> |
|||
With Darwin's theory, a general acceptance quickly appeared that a classification should reflect the Darwinian principle of [[common descent]].<ref name="Britannica – since Linnaeus">{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy/Classification-since-Linnaeus |title=taxonomy – Classification since Linnaeus {{!}} biology |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405075916/https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy/Classification-since-Linnaeus |archive-date=5 April 2017 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> [[Tree of life (science)|Tree of life]] representations became popular in scientific works, with known fossil groups incorporated. One of the first modern groups tied to fossil ancestors was birds.<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Black |first=Riley |date=7 December 2010 |title=Thomas Henry Huxley and the Dinobirds |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/thomas-henry-huxley-and-the-dinobirds-88519294/ |magazine=Smithsonian Magazine |location=Washington, DC |publisher=[[Smithsonian Institution]] |access-date=10 November 2023 |archive-date=10 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231110094503/https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/thomas-henry-huxley-and-the-dinobirds-88519294/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Using the then newly discovered fossils of ''[[Archaeopteryx]]'' and ''[[Hesperornis]]'', [[Thomas Henry Huxley]] pronounced that they had evolved from dinosaurs, a group formally named by [[Richard Owen]] in 1842.<ref>{{cite book |author-link=Thomas Henry Huxley |last=Huxley |first=Thomas Henry |date=1876 |chapter=Lectures on Evolution |title=Collected Essays |volume=IV |pages=46–138 |url= http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE4/LecEvol.html |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110628224543/http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE4/LecEvol.html |archive-date=28 June 2011}} Original text w/ figures. First published as ''New York Tribune'', Extra no. 36.</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |url= https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Henry-Huxley |title=Thomas Henry Huxley {{!}} British biologist |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180206114405/https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Henry-Huxley |archive-date=6 February 2018 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> The resulting description, that of dinosaurs "giving rise to" or being "the ancestors of" birds, is the essential hallmark of [[Evolutionary taxonomy|evolutionary taxonomic]] thinking. As more and more fossil groups were found and recognized in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, [[paleontology|palaeontologists]] worked to understand the history of animals through the ages by linking together known groups.<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Meaning of Fossils: Episodes in the History of Palaeontology |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-NuYXr8BszwC&pg=PA24 |last=Rudwick |first=M. J. S. |date=1985 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=9780226731032 |page=24}}</ref> With the [[modern synthesis (20th century)|modern evolutionary synthesis]] of the early 1940s, an essentially modern understanding of the evolution of the major groups was in place. As evolutionary taxonomy is based on Linnaean taxonomic ranks, the two terms are largely interchangeable in modern use.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Paterlini |first=Marta |date=September 2007 |title=There shall be order. The legacy of Linnaeus in the age of molecular biology |journal=EMBO Reports |volume=8 |issue=9 |pages=814–816 |doi=10.1038/sj.embor.7401061 |doi-access=free |pmc=1973966 |pmid=17767191}}</ref> |
|||
The [[cladistic]] method has emerged since the 1960s.<ref name="Britannica – since Linnaeus" /> In 1958, [[Julian Huxley]] used the term ''clade''.<ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> Later, in 1960, Cain and Harrison introduced the term ''cladistic''.<ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> The salient feature is arranging taxa in a hierarchical [[evolutionary tree]], with the desired objective of all named taxa being monophyletic.<ref name="Britannica – since Linnaeus" /> A taxon is called monophyletic if it includes all the descendants of an ancestral form.<ref name="Mike Taylor">{{Cite web |url= http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/faq/s-class/phyletic/ |date=17 July 2003 |title=What do terms like monophyletic, paraphyletic and polyphyletic mean? |last=Taylor |first=Mike |website=miketaylor.org.uk |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100801072310/http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/faq/s-class/phyletic/ |archive-date=1 August 2010}}</ref><ref name="NCSE">{{Cite web |url= https://ncse.com/book/export/html/2206 |title=Polyphyletic vs. Monophyletic |website=National Center for Science Education |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405170039/https://ncse.com/book/export/html/2206 |archive-date=5 April 2017}}</ref> Groups that have descendant groups removed from them are termed [[paraphyletic]],<ref name="Mike Taylor" /> while groups representing more than one branch from the tree of life are called [[polyphyletic]].<ref name="Mike Taylor" /><ref name="NCSE" /> Monophyletic groups are recognized and diagnosed on the basis of [[synapomorphies]], shared derived character states.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Brower |first1=Andrew V. Z. |first2=Randall T. |last2=Schuh |date=2021 |title=Biological Systematics: Principles and Applications |edition=3rd |publisher=Cornell University Press |location=Ithaca, New York |page=13}}</ref> |
|||
Cladistic classifications are compatible with traditional Linnean taxonomy and the Codes of [[Zoological nomenclature|Zoological]] and [[Botanical nomenclature]], to a certain extent.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Schuh |first=Randall T. |title=The Linnaean system and its 250-year persistence |journal=The Botanical Review |volume=69 |issue=1 |date=2003 |page=59|doi=10.1663/0006-8101(2003)069[0059:TLSAIY]2.0.CO;2 }}</ref> An alternative system of nomenclature, the ''[[PhyloCode|International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature]]'' or ''PhyloCode'' has been proposed, which regulates the formal naming of clades.<ref>{{Cite web |url= https://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/ |title=The PhyloCode |last1=Queiroz |first1=Philip D. |last2=de Cantino |first2=Kevin |website=Ohio.edu |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160510200022/https://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/ |archive-date=10 May 2016}}</ref><ref name="Cantino & de Queiroz 2020" /><ref name="Laurin 2023 Advent" /> Linnaean ranks are optional and have no formal standing under the ''PhyloCode'', which is intended to coexist with the current, rank-based codes.<ref name="Cantino & de Queiroz 2020" /> While popularity of phylogenetic nomenclature has grown steadily in the last few decades,<ref name="Laurin 2023 Advent" /> it remains to be seen whether a majority of systematists will eventually adopt the ''PhyloCode'' or continue using the current systems of nomenclature that have been employed (and modified, but arguably not as much as some systematists wish)<ref name="Dubois 2007">{{cite journal |last1=Dubois |first1=Alain |title=Naming taxa from cladograms: A cautionary tale |journal=Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution |date=1 February 2007 |volume=42 |issue=2 |pages=317–330 |doi=10.1016/j.ympev.2006.06.007 |pmid=16949307 |bibcode=2007MolPE..42..317D |url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2006.06.007 |issn=1055-7903 |access-date=21 October 2023 |archive-date=13 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231113101502/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790306002375?via%3Dihub |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Dubois et al. 2019">{{cite journal |last1=Dubois |first1=Alain |last2=Bauer |first2=Aaron M. |last3=Ceríaco |first3=Luis M. P. |last4=Dusoulier |first4=François |last5=Frétey |first5=Thierry |last6=Löbl |first6=Ivan |last7=Lorvelec |first7=Olivier |last8=Ohler |first8=Annemarie |last9=Stopiglia |first9=Renata |last10=Aescht |first10=Erna |title=The Linz Zoocode project: A set of new proposals regarding the terminology, the Principles and Rules of zoological nomenclature. First report of activities (2014‒2019) |journal=Bionomina |date=17 December 2019 |volume=17 |issue=1 |pages=1–111 |doi=10.11646/BIONOMINA.17.1.1|doi-access=free }}</ref> for over 250 years. |
|||
=== Kingdoms and domains === |
|||
[[File:Biological classification L Pengo vflip.svg|thumb|upright|The basic scheme of modern classification. Many other levels can be used; domain, the highest level within life, is both new and disputed.]] |
|||
{{Main|Kingdom (biology)|Domain (biology)}} |
|||
Well before Linnaeus, plants and animals were considered separate Kingdoms.<ref name="Kingdom classification">{{Cite news |url= http://www.biologydiscussion.com/biology/kingdom-classification-of-living-organism/5542 |title=Kingdom Classification of Living Organism |date=2 December 2014 |work=Biology Discussion |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170405073641/http://www.biologydiscussion.com/biology/kingdom-classification-of-living-organism/5542 |archive-date=5 April 2017}}</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=April 2017}} Linnaeus used this as the top rank, dividing the physical world into the vegetable, animal and mineral kingdoms. As advances in microscopy made the classification of microorganisms possible, the number of kingdoms increased, five- and six-kingdom systems being the most common. |
|||
[[Domain (biology)|Domains]] are a relatively new grouping. First proposed in 1977, [[Carl Woese]]'s [[three-domain system]] was not generally accepted until later.<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.igb.illinois.edu/about/archaea |title=Carl Woese {{!}} Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology |website=www.igb.Illinois.edu |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170428163950/http://www.igb.illinois.edu/about/archaea |archive-date=28 April 2017}}</ref> One main characteristic of the three-domain method is the separation of [[Archaea]] and [[Bacteria]], previously grouped into the single kingdom Bacteria (a kingdom also sometimes called [[Monera]]),<ref name="Kingdom classification" /> with the [[Eukaryota]] for all organisms whose cells contain a [[Nucleus (biology)|nucleus]].<ref>{{cite book |editor1-link=Joel Cracraft |editor1-last=Cracraft |editor1-first=Joel |editor2-last=Donaghue |editor2-first=Michael J. |date=2004 |title=Assembling the Tree of Life |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0195172345 |pages=45, 78, 555}}</ref> A small number of scientists include a sixth kingdom, Archaea, but do not accept the domain method.<ref name="Kingdom classification" /> |
|||
[[Thomas Cavalier-Smith]], who published extensively on the classification of [[protist]]s, in 2002<ref name="pmid11931142">{{cite journal |last=Cavalier-Smith |first=T. |title=The phagotrophic origin of eukaryotes and phylogenetic classification of Protozoa |journal=International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology |volume=52 |issue=Pt 2 |pages=297–354 |date=March 2002 |pmid=11931142 |doi=10.1099/00207713-52-2-297 |url=http://ijs.sgmjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=11931142 |access-date=21 November 2022 |archive-date=29 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729113756/http://ijs.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/ijsem |url-status=live }}</ref> proposed that the [[Neomura]], the clade that groups together the Archaea and [[Eukaryote|Eucarya]]<!--yeah, Woese used a 'c' here-->, would have evolved from Bacteria, more precisely from [[Actinomycetota]]. His 2004 classification treated the [[archaeobacteria]] as part of a subkingdom of the kingdom Bacteria, i.e., he rejected the three-domain system entirely.<ref name="CavalierSmith2004" /> Stefan Luketa in 2012 proposed a five "dominion" system, adding [[Prion]]obiota ([[Non-cellular life|acellular]] and without [[nucleic acid]]) and [[Virus]]obiota (acellular but ''with'' nucleic acid) to the traditional three domains.<ref name="Luketa2012">{{Cite journal |last=Luketa |first=S. |date=2012 |title=New views on the megaclassification of life |url= http://protistology.ifmo.ru/num7_4/luketa_protistology_7-4.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Protistology |volume=7 |issue=4 |pages=218–237 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150402150257/http://protistology.ifmo.ru/num7_4/luketa_protistology_7-4.pdf |archive-date=2 April 2015}}</ref> |
|||
{{center|{{Biological systems}}}} |
|||
=== Recent comprehensive classifications === |
|||
Partial classifications exist for many individual groups of organisms and are revised and replaced as new information becomes available; however, comprehensive, published treatments of most or all life are rarer; recent examples are that of Adl et al., 2012 and 2019,<ref name="Adl-et-al-2012">{{Cite journal |last1=Adl |first1=S. M. |last2=Simpson |first2=A. G. B. |last3=Lane |first3=C. E. |last4=Lukeš |first4=J. |last5=Bass |first5=D. |last6=Bowser |first6=S. S. |display-authors=etal |date=December 2015 |title=The revised classification of eukaryotes |journal=Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology |volume=59 |issue=5 |pages=429–493 |doi=10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x |pmc=3483872 |pmid=23020233}}</ref><ref name="Adl-et-al-2019">{{Cite journal |last1=Adl |first1=S. M. |last2=Bass |first2=D. |last3=Lane |first3=C. E. |last4=Lukeš |first4=J. |last5=Schoch |first5=C. L. |last6=Smirnov |first6=A. |display-authors=etal |date=2019 |title=Revisions to the classification, nomenclature, and diversity of eukaryotes |journal=Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology |volume=66 |issue=1 |pages=4–119 |doi=10.1111/jeu.12691 |pmc= 6492006|pmid=30257078|doi-access=free}}</ref> which covers eukaryotes only with an emphasis on protists, and Ruggiero et al., 2015,<ref name="Ruggiero-et-al-2015">{{Cite journal |last1=Ruggiero |first1=Michael A. |last2=Gordon |first2=D. P. |last3=Orrell |first3=T. M. |last4=Bailly |first4=N. |last5=Bourgoin |first5=T. |last6=Brusca |first6=R. C. |display-authors=etal |date=2015 |title=A higher level classification of all living organisms |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=e0119248 |bibcode=2015PLoSO..1019248R |bibcode-access=free |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0119248 |pmc=4418965 |pmid=25923521|doi-access=free}}</ref> covering both eukaryotes and [[prokaryote]]s to the rank of Order, although both exclude fossil representatives.<ref name="Ruggiero-et-al-2015" /> A separate compilation (Ruggiero, 2014)<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Döring |first=Markus |title=Families of Living Organisms (FALO) |url=https://www.gbif.org/dataset/8067e0a2-a26d-4831-8a1e-21b9118a299c |website=GBIF |date=August 13, 2015 |doi=10.15468/tfp6yv |access-date=11 March 2020 |archive-date=2 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200302232032/https://www.gbif.org/dataset/8067e0a2-a26d-4831-8a1e-21b9118a299c |url-status=live }}</ref> covers extant taxa to the rank of Family. Other, database-driven treatments include the [[Encyclopedia of Life]], the [[Global Biodiversity Information Facility]], the [[NCBI taxonomy database]], the [[Interim Register of Marine and Nonmarine Genera]], the [[Open Tree of Life]], and the [[Catalogue of Life]]. The [[Paleobiology Database]] is a resource for fossils. |
|||
== Application == |
|||
Biological taxonomy is a sub-discipline of [[biology]], and is generally practiced by biologists known as "taxonomists", though enthusiastic [[Natural history|naturalists]] are also frequently involved in the publication of new taxa.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-big-ugly-problem-heart-of-taxonomy-180964629/ |first1=Benjamin |last1=Jones |date=September 7, 2017 |title=A Few Bad Scientists Are Threatening to Topple Taxonomy |website=Smithsonian |access-date=24 February 2019 |archive-date=8 February 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190208041357/https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-big-ugly-problem-heart-of-taxonomy-180964629/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Because taxonomy aims to describe and organize [[life]], the work conducted by taxonomists is essential for the study of [[biodiversity]] and the resulting field of [[conservation biology]].<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/taxonomy-systematics/what-is-taxonomy/index.html |title=What is taxonomy? |publisher=Natural History Museum |location=London |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131001152618/http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/taxonomy-systematics/what-is-taxonomy/index.html |archive-date=1 October 2013 |access-date=23 December 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=McNeely |first=Jeffrey A. |date=2002 |title=The role of taxonomy in conserving biodiversity |url= https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7b06/e3d09692ef9f2b464fbfb7807ff32a35ce47.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=Journal for Nature Conservation |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=145–153 |doi=10.1078/1617-1381-00015 |bibcode=2002JNatC..10..145M |s2cid=16953722 |s2cid-access=free |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20171224155349/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7b06/e3d09692ef9f2b464fbfb7807ff32a35ce47.pdf |archive-date=24 December 2017 |via=Semantic Scholar}}</ref> |
|||
=== Classifying organisms === |
|||
{{Main|Taxonomic rank}} |
|||
Biological classification is a critical component of the taxonomic process. As a result, it informs the user as to what the relatives of the taxon are hypothesized to be. Biological classification uses taxonomic ranks, including among others (in order from most inclusive to least inclusive): [[Domain (biology)|domain]], [[Kingdom (biology)|kingdom]], [[phylum]], [[Class (biology)|class]], [[Order (biology)|order]], [[Family (biology)|family]], [[genus]], [[species]], and [[Strain (biology)|strain]].<ref>{{Cite news |url= https://www.mnemonic-device.com/biology/taxonomy/domain-kingdom-phylum-class-order-family-genus-species/ |title=Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species |website=Mnemonic Device |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170606171902/https://www.mnemonic-device.com/biology/taxonomy/domain-kingdom-phylum-class-order-family-genus-species/ |archive-date=6 June 2017}}</ref>{{NoteTag|This ranking system, except for "Strain", can be remembered by the mnemonic "Do Kings Play Chess On Fine Glass Sets?"}} |
|||
=== Taxonomic descriptions === |
|||
{{See also|Species description}} |
|||
[[File:Nepenthes smilesii type specimen.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Type (biology)|Type]] specimen for ''[[Nepenthes smilesii]]'', a tropical [[pitcher plant]]]] |
|||
The "definition" of a taxon is encapsulated by its description or its diagnosis or by both combined. There are no set rules governing the definition of taxa, but the naming and publication of new taxa is governed by sets of rules.<ref name="Herbarium" /> In [[zoology]], the [[nomenclature]] for the more commonly used ranks ([[Superfamily (taxonomy)|superfamily]] to [[subspecies]]), is regulated by the ''[[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature]]'' (''ICZN Code'').<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.animalbase.uni-goettingen.de/zooweb/servlet/AnimalBase/loadcachedpage?url=animalbase-code.html |title=ICZN Code |website=AnimalBase |access-date=8 April 2017 |archive-date=3 October 2022 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20221003055350/http://www.animalbase.uni-goettingen.de/zooweb/servlet/AnimalBase/loadcachedpage?url=animalbase-code.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> In the fields of [[phycology]], [[mycology]], and [[botany]], the naming of taxa is governed by the ''[[International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants]]'' (''ICN'').<ref>{{Cite web |title=International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants |url= http://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/main.php |work=IAPT-Taxon.org |publisher=[[International Association for Plant Taxonomy]] |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130111104255/http://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/main.php |archive-date=11 January 2013}}</ref> |
|||
The initial description of a taxon involves five main requirements:<ref>{{Cite web |title=How can I describe new species? |url= http://iczn.org/content/how-can-i-describe-new-species |work=ICZN.org |publisher=[[International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]] |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120306133052/http://iczn.org/content/how-can-i-describe-new-species |archive-date=6 March 2012 |access-date=21 May 2020}}</ref> |
|||
# The taxon must be given a name based on the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet (a [[binomial nomenclature|binomial]] for new species, or uninomial for other ranks). |
|||
# The name must be unique (i.e. not a [[homonym (biology)|homonym]]). |
|||
# The description must be based on at least one name-bearing [[Type species|type specimen]]. |
|||
# It should include statements about appropriate attributes either to describe (define) the taxon or to differentiate it from other taxa (the diagnosis, ''ICZN Code'', Article 13.1.1, ''ICN'', Article 38, which may or may not be based on morphology<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lawley |first1=Jonathan W. |last2=Gamero-Mora |first2=Edgar |last3=Maronna |first3=Maximiliano M. |last4=Chiaverano |first4=Luciano M. |last5=Stampar |first5=Sérgio N. |last6=Hopcroft |first6=Russell R. |last7=Collins |first7=Allen G. |last8=Morandini |first8=André C. |date=19 September 2022 |title=Morphology is not always useful for diagnosis, and that's ok: Species hypotheses should not be bound to a class of data. Reply to Brown and Gibbons (S Afr J Sci. 2022;118(9/10), Art. #12590) |url=https://sajs.co.za/article/view/14495 |journal=South African Journal of Science |volume=118 |issue=9/10 |doi=10.17159/sajs.2022/14495 |s2cid=252562185 |issn=1996-7489 |doi-access=free |access-date=20 October 2022 |archive-date=20 October 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221020063714/https://sajs.co.za/article/view/14495 |url-status=live }}</ref>). Both codes deliberately separate defining the content of a taxon (its [[circumscription (taxonomy)|circumscription]]) from defining its name. |
|||
# These first four requirements must be published in a work that is obtainable in numerous identical copies, as a permanent scientific record. |
|||
However, often much more information is included, like the geographic range of the taxon, ecological notes, chemistry, behavior, etc. How researchers arrive at their taxa varies: depending on the available data, and resources, methods vary from simple [[Quantitative property|quantitative]] or [[Qualitative property|qualitative]] comparisons of striking features, to elaborate computer analyses of large amounts of [[DNA sequence]] data.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Taxonomy – Evaluating taxonomic characters |url= https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy/Evaluating-taxonomic-characters |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20190422143927/https://www.britannica.com/science/taxonomy/Evaluating-taxonomic-characters |archive-date=22 April 2019 |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]}}</ref> |
|||
=== Author citation === |
|||
{{Main|Author citation (botany)|Author citation (zoology)}} |
|||
An "authority" may be placed after a scientific name.<ref name="AJE">{{Cite web |url= http://www.aje.com/en/arc/editing-tip-scientific-names-species/ |title=Editing Tip: Scientific Names of Species |publisher=American Journal Experts, Research Square Company |website=AJE.com |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170409021714/http://www.aje.com/en/arc/editing-tip-scientific-names-species/ |archive-date=9 April 2017}}</ref> The authority is the name of the scientist or scientists who first validly published the name.<ref name="AJE" /> For example, in 1758, Linnaeus gave the [[Asian elephant]] the scientific name ''Elephas maximus'', so the name is sometimes written as "''Elephas maximus'' Linnaeus, 1758".<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://study.com/academy/lesson/carolus-linnaeus-classification-taxonomy-contributions-to-biology.html |title=Carolus Linnaeus: Classification, Taxonomy & Contributions to Biology – Video & Lesson Transcript |website=Study.com |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170409021600/http://study.com/academy/lesson/carolus-linnaeus-classification-taxonomy-contributions-to-biology.html |archive-date=9 April 2017}}</ref> The names of authors are often abbreviated: the abbreviation ''L.'', for ''Linnaeus,'' is commonly used. In botany, there is, in fact, a regulated list of standard abbreviations (see [[list of botanists by author abbreviation]]).<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.biocyclopedia.com/index/biological_classification.php |title=Biological Classification |last=Biocyclopedia.com |website=biocyclopedia.com |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170514164313/http://www.biocyclopedia.com/index/biological_classification.php |archive-date=14 May 2017}}</ref> The system for assigning authorities differs slightly between [[Author citation (botany)|botany]] and [[Author citation (zoology)|zoology]].<ref name="Herbarium" /> However, it is standard that if the genus of a species has been changed since the original description, the original authority's name is placed in parentheses.<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.annelida.net/zootax-tutor.html |title=Zoological nomenclature: a basic guide for non-taxonomist authors |website=Annelida.net |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170316112709/http://www.annelida.net/zootax-tutor.html |archive-date=16 March 2017}}</ref> |
|||
== Phenetics == |
|||
[[File:Phylogenetics.svg|thumb|300px|A comparison of phylogenetic and phenetic (character-based) concepts]] |
|||
{{Main|Phenetics}} |
|||
In phenetics, also known as taximetrics, or numerical taxonomy, organisms are classified based on overall similarity, regardless of their phylogeny or evolutionary relationships.<ref name="BiologyDiscussion" /> It results in a measure of hypergeometric "distance" between taxa. Phenetic methods have become relatively rare in modern times, largely superseded by [[Cladistics|cladistic]] analyses, as phenetic methods do not distinguish shared ancestral (or [[plesiomorph]]ic) traits from shared derived (or [[apomorphic]]) traits.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Classification |url= https://projects.ncsu.edu/project/evoresources/Evolutionary%20medicine/classification/classification16.htm |publisher=[[North Carolina State University]] |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170414163250/https://projects.ncsu.edu/project/evoresources/Evolutionary%20medicine/classification/classification16.htm |archive-date=14 April 2017 |access-date=27 April 2017}}</ref> However, certain phenetic methods, such as [[neighbor joining]], have persisted, as rapid estimators of relationships when more advanced methods (such as [[Bayesian inference]]) are too computationally expensive.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Molecular Marker Glossary |url= http://www.uwyo.edu/dbmcd/molmark/mcdgloss.html |last=McDonald |first=David |date=Fall 2008 |publisher=[[University of Wyoming]] |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20070610123503/http://www.uwyo.edu/dbmcd/molmark/McDGloss.html |archive-date=10 June 2007}}</ref> |
|||
== Databases == |
|||
{{Main|Taxonomic database}} |
|||
Modern taxonomy uses [[database]] technologies to search and catalogue classifications and their documentation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wood |first1=Dylan |last2=King |first2=Margaret |last3=Landis |first3=Drew |last4=Courtney |first4=William |last5=Wang |first5=Runtang |last6=Kelly |first6=Ross |last7=Turner |first7=Jessica A. |last8=Calhoun |first8=Vince D. |date=26 August 2014 |title=Harnessing modern web application technology to create intuitive and efficient data visualization and sharing tools |journal=Frontiers in Neuroinformatics |volume=8 |pages=71 |doi=10.3389/fninf.2014.00071 |issn=1662-5196 |pmc=4144441 |pmid=25206330|doi-access=free}}</ref> While there is no commonly used database, there are comprehensive databases such as the ''[[Catalogue of Life]]'', which attempts to list every documented species.<ref>{{Cite web |url= http://www.theplantlist.org/about/ |title= About – The Plant List |website= theplantlist.org |access-date= 8 April 2017 |archive-date= 21 June 2017 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170621190909/http://www.theplantlist.org/about/ |url-status= live }}</ref> The catalogue listed 1.64 million species for all kingdoms {{as of|2016|4|lc=on}}, claiming coverage of more than three-quarters of the estimated species known to modern science.<ref name="About the Catalogue of Life">{{Cite web |url= http://www.catalogueoflife.org/annual-checklist/2016/info/about |title=About the Catalogue of Life: 2016 Annual Checklist |website=Catalogue of Life |publisher=[[Integrated Taxonomic Information System]] (ITIS) |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160515032942/http://www.catalogueoflife.org/annual-checklist/2016/info/about |archive-date=15 May 2016 |access-date=22 May 2016}}</ref> |
|||
== See also == |
|||
{{Div col|small=yes}} |
|||
* [[Automated species identification]] |
|||
* [[Bacterial taxonomy]] |
|||
* [[Cluster analysis]] |
|||
* [[Consortium for the Barcode of Life]] |
|||
* [[Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities]] |
|||
* [[Genetypes]] |
|||
* [[Glossary of scientific naming]] |
|||
* [[Identification (biology)]] |
* [[Identification (biology)]] |
||
* [[ |
* ''[[Incertae sedis]]'' |
||
* [[ |
* [[Open Tree of Life]] |
||
* [[ |
* [[Parataxonomy]] |
||
* [[ |
* [[Phenogram]] |
||
* [[Set theory]] |
|||
* [[Ontology (information science)|Ontology]] |
|||
* [[ |
* [[Taxonomy]] (general) |
||
* [[ |
* [[Virus classification]] |
||
{{div col end}} |
|||
* [[Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy]] |
|||
* [[SOLO Taxonomy]] |
|||
== Notes == |
|||
* [[Species problem]] |
|||
{{NoteFoot}} |
|||
* [[Systematics]] |
|||
* [[Taxocene]] |
|||
== References == |
|||
* [[Lexicon]] |
|||
{{Reflist}} |
|||
* [[Plant morphology]] |
|||
== Bibliography == |
|||
{{refbegin}} |
|||
* {{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=X7lfMACvjs4C |title=Systematic Botany |last=Datta |first=Subhash Chandra |date=1988 |publisher=New Age International |isbn=9788122400137 |edition=4 |location=New Delhi |access-date=25 January 2015 |archive-date=13 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231113101351/https://books.google.com/books?id=X7lfMACvjs4C |url-status=live }} |
|||
* {{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VfQnuwh3bw8C |title=Plant taxonomy and biosystematics |last=Stace |first=Clive A. |date=1989 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |isbn=9780521427852 |edition=2nd. |location=Cambridge |author-link=Clive A. Stace |access-date=19 April 2015 |orig-year=1980 |archive-date=13 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230113180249/https://books.google.com/books?id=VfQnuwh3bw8C |url-status=live }} |
|||
* {{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0bYs8F0Mb9gC |title=Plant Taxonomy: The Systematic Evaluation of Comparative Data |last=Stuessy |first=Tod F. |date=2009 |publisher=Columbia University Press |isbn=9780231147125 |access-date=6 February 2014 |archive-date=13 November 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231113101356/https://books.google.com/books?id=0bYs8F0Mb9gC |url-status=live }} |
|||
*{{Cite journal |last=Turrill |first=W. B. |date=1938 |title=The Expansion Of Taxonomy With Special Reference To Spermatophyta |journal=Biological Reviews |volume=13 |issue=4 |pages=342–373 |doi=10.1111/j.1469-185X.1938.tb00522.x|s2cid=84905335}} |
|||
* {{cite book |last1=Wiley |first1=Edward O. |first2=Bruce S. |last2=Lieberman |date=2011 |title=Phylogenetics: Theory and Practice of Phylogenetic Systematics |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |edition=2nd |isbn=9780470905968}} |
|||
{{refend}} |
|||
== External links == |
== External links == |
||
* [http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/taxonomy-systematics/what-is-taxonomy/index.html What is taxonomy?] at the [http://www.nhm.ac.uk/ ''Natural History Museum London''] |
|||
* [http://www.db.dk/jni/lifeboat/info.asp?subjectid=15 Hjørland: Scientific classification and taxonomy. IN: The epistemological Lifeboat] |
|||
* [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/ Taxonomy] at [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ NCBI] the ''National Center for Biotechnology Information'' |
|||
* [http://species.wikimedia.org/ Wikispecies Main Page] |
|||
* [https://www.uniprot.org/taxonomy/ Taxonomy] at [https://www.uniprot.org/ UniProt] the ''Universal Protein Resource'' |
|||
* [http://www.itis.gov/ Integrated Taxonomic Information System] |
|||
* [https://www.itis.gov/ ITIS] the ''Integrated Taxonomic Information System'' |
|||
* [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi/ Taxonomy Browser of National Center for Biotechnology Information] |
|||
* [http://www.cetaf.org/ CETaF] the ''Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities'' |
|||
* [http://www.taxonomystrategies.com/html/bibliography.htm Library of Taxonomy Resources] |
|||
* [http://species.wikimedia.org/ Wikispecies] ''free species directory'' |
|||
* [http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/tm-vs-thesauri.html Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic Maps! - Making sense of it all] |
|||
* [https://www.thescienceclass.online/2019/10/biological-classification.html Biological classification.] {{Webarchive |url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200813180358/https://www.thescienceclass.online/2019/10/biological-classification.html |date=13 August 2020}} |
|||
* [http://www.taxonomies-sig.org/ Taxonomies & Controlled Vocabularies Special Interest Group of the American Society for Indexing] |
|||
* [http://www.cetaf.org Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities] |
|||
{{Branches of biology}} |
|||
[[Category:Taxonomy| Taxonomy]] |
|||
{{Subject bar |
|||
[[Category:Classification systems|Classification systems]] |
|||
|wikt = yes |
|||
[[Category:Greek loanwords]] |
|||
|wikt-search = taxonomy |
|||
|commons = yes |
|||
|q = yes |
|||
|s = yes |
|||
|v = yes |
|||
|d = yes |
|||
|portal1 = Biology |
|||
}} |
|||
[[Category:Taxonomy (biology)| ]] |
|||
{{Link FA|ca}} |
|||
[[Category:Biological nomenclature]] |
|||
{{Link FA|es}} |
|||
[[Category:Biological classification]] |
|||
[[ar:علم التصنيف]] |
|||
[[Category:Neo-Latin terminology]] |
|||
[[bs:Taksonomija]] |
|||
[[br:Taksinomiezh]] |
|||
[[bg:Таксономия]] |
|||
[[ca:Taxonomia]] |
|||
[[cs:Taxonomie]] |
|||
[[da:Taksonomi]] |
|||
[[de:Taxonomie]] |
|||
[[et:Taksonoomia]] |
|||
[[el:Ταξινομία]] |
|||
[[es:Taxonomía]] |
|||
[[eo:Taksonomio]] |
|||
[[fr:Taxinomie]] |
|||
[[fy:Taksonomy]] |
|||
[[gv:Rang-oardraghey]] |
|||
[[gl:Taxonomía]] |
|||
[[got:𐍄𐌴𐍅𐌰𐌽𐍉𐌼𐌾𐌰]] |
|||
[[ko:분류학]] |
|||
[[hi:वर्गिकी]] |
|||
[[hr:Taksonomija]] |
|||
[[id:Taksonomi]] |
|||
[[it:Tassonomia]] |
|||
[[he:טקסונומיה]] |
|||
[[la:Taxinomia]] |
|||
[[lv:Taksonomija]] |
|||
[[lt:Taksonomija]] |
|||
[[lij:Taxonomïa]] |
|||
[[li:Taxonomie]] |
|||
[[hu:Rendszertan]] |
|||
[[ms:Taksonomi]] |
|||
[[nl:Taxonomie]] |
|||
[[ja:分類学]] |
|||
[[no:Taksonomi]] |
|||
[[nov:Taxonomie]] |
|||
[[oc:Taxinomia]] |
|||
[[pl:Taksonomia]] |
|||
[[pt:Taxonomia]] |
|||
[[ro:Taxonomie]] |
|||
[[ru:Таксономия]] |
|||
[[scn:Tassinumìa]] |
|||
[[simple:Taxonomy]] |
|||
[[sk:Taxonómia (biológia)]] |
|||
[[sl:Taksonomija]] |
|||
[[sr:Таксономија]] |
|||
[[sh:Taksonomija]] |
|||
[[fi:Taksonomia]] |
|||
[[sv:Taxonomi]] |
|||
[[th:อนุกรมวิธาน]] |
|||
[[vi:Phân loại học]] |
|||
[[tr:Taksonomi]] |
|||
[[uk:Таксономія]] |
|||
[[yi:טאקסאנאמיע]] |
|||
[[zh:分类学]] |
Latest revision as of 14:44, 9 December 2024
Part of a series on |
Evolutionary biology |
---|
In biology, taxonomy (from Ancient Greek τάξις (taxis) 'arrangement' and -νομία (-nomia) 'method') is the scientific study of naming, defining (circumscribing) and classifying groups of biological organisms based on shared characteristics. Organisms are grouped into taxa (singular: taxon) and these groups are given a taxonomic rank; groups of a given rank can be aggregated to form a more inclusive group of higher rank, thus creating a taxonomic hierarchy. The principal ranks in modern use are domain, kingdom, phylum (division is sometimes used in botany in place of phylum), class, order, family, genus, and species. The Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus is regarded as the founder of the current system of taxonomy, as he developed a ranked system known as Linnaean taxonomy for categorizing organisms and binomial nomenclature for naming organisms.
With advances in the theory, data and analytical technology of biological systematics, the Linnaean system has transformed into a system of modern biological classification intended to reflect the evolutionary relationships among organisms, both living and extinct.
Definition
The exact definition of taxonomy varies from source to source, but the core of the discipline remains: the conception, naming, and classification of groups of organisms.[1] As points of reference, recent definitions of taxonomy are presented below:
- Theory and practice of grouping individuals into species, arranging species into larger groups, and giving those groups names, thus producing a classification.[2]
- A field of science (and a major component of systematics) that encompasses description, identification, nomenclature, and classification[3]
- The science of classification, in biology the arrangement of organisms into a classification[4]
- "The science of classification as applied to living organisms, including the study of means of formation of species, etc."[5]
- "The analysis of an organism's characteristics for the purpose of classification"[6]
- "Systematics studies phylogeny to provide a pattern that can be translated into the classification and names of the more inclusive field of taxonomy" (listed as a desirable but unusual definition)[7]
The varied definitions either place taxonomy as a sub-area of systematics (definition 2), invert that relationship (definition 6), or appear to consider the two terms synonymous. There is some disagreement as to whether biological nomenclature is considered a part of taxonomy (definitions 1 and 2), or a part of systematics outside taxonomy.[8][9] For example, definition 6 is paired with the following definition of systematics that places nomenclature outside taxonomy:[6]
- Systematics: "The study of the identification, taxonomy, and nomenclature of organisms, including the classification of living things with regard to their natural relationships and the study of variation and the evolution of taxa".
In 1970, Michener et al. defined "systematic biology" and "taxonomy" (terms that are often confused and used interchangeably) in relation to one another as follows:[10]
Systematic biology (hereafter called simply systematics) is the field that (a) provides scientific names for organisms, (b) describes them, (c) preserves collections of them, (d) provides classifications for the organisms, keys for their identification, and data on their distributions, (e) investigates their evolutionary histories, and (f) considers their environmental adaptations. This is a field with a long history that in recent years has experienced a notable renaissance, principally with respect to theoretical content. Part of the theoretical material has to do with evolutionary areas (topics e and f above), the rest relates especially to the problem of classification. Taxonomy is that part of Systematics concerned with topics (a) to (d) above.
A whole set of terms including taxonomy, systematic biology, systematics, scientific classification, biological classification, and phylogenetics have at times had overlapping meanings – sometimes the same, sometimes slightly different, but always related and intersecting.[1][11] The broadest meaning of "taxonomy" is used here. The term itself was introduced in 1813 by de Candolle, in his Théorie élémentaire de la botanique.[12] John Lindley provided an early definition of systematics in 1830, although he wrote of "systematic botany" rather than using the term "systematics".[13] Europeans tend to use the terms "systematics" and "biosystematics" for the study of biodiversity as a whole, whereas North Americans tend to use "taxonomy" more frequently.[14] However, taxonomy, and in particular alpha taxonomy, is more specifically the identification, description, and naming (i.e., nomenclature) of organisms,[15] while "classification" focuses on placing organisms within hierarchical groups that show their relationships to other organisms.
Monograph and taxonomic revision
A taxonomic revision or taxonomic review is a novel analysis of the variation patterns in a particular taxon. This analysis may be executed on the basis of any combination of the various available kinds of characters, such as morphological, anatomical, palynological, biochemical and genetic. A monograph or complete revision is a revision that is comprehensive for a taxon for the information given at a particular time, and for the entire world. Other (partial) revisions may be restricted in the sense that they may only use some of the available character sets or have a limited spatial scope. A revision results in a conformation of or new insights in the relationships between the subtaxa within the taxon under study, which may lead to a change in the classification of these subtaxa, the identification of new subtaxa, or the merger of previous subtaxa.[16]
Taxonomic characters
Taxonomic characters are the taxonomic attributes that can be used to provide the evidence from which relationships (the phylogeny) between taxa are inferred.[17][18] Kinds of taxonomic characters include:[19]
- Morphological characters
- General external morphology
- Special structures (e.g., genitalia)
- Internal morphology (anatomy)
- Embryology
- Karyology and other cytological factors
- Physiological characters
- Metabolic factors
- Body secretions
- Genic sterility factors
- Molecular characters
- Immunological distance
- Electrophoretic differences
- Amino acid sequences of proteins
- DNA hybridization
- DNA and RNA sequences
- Restriction endonuclease analyses
- Other molecular differences
- Behavioral characters
- Courtship and other ethological isolating mechanisms
- Other behavior patterns
- Ecological characters
- Habit and habitats
- Food
- Seasonal variations
- Parasites and hosts
- Geographic characters
- General biogeographic distribution patterns
- Sympatric-allopatric relationship of populations
Alpha and beta taxonomy
The term "alpha taxonomy" is primarily used to refer to the discipline of finding, describing, and naming taxa, particularly species.[20] In earlier literature, the term had a different meaning, referring to morphological taxonomy, and the products of research through the end of the 19th century.[21]
William Bertram Turrill introduced the term "alpha taxonomy" in a series of papers published in 1935 and 1937 in which he discussed the philosophy and possible future directions of the discipline of taxonomy.[22]
... there is an increasing desire amongst taxonomists to consider their problems from wider viewpoints, to investigate the possibilities of closer co-operation with their cytological, ecological and genetics colleagues and to acknowledge that some revision or expansion, perhaps of a drastic nature, of their aims and methods, may be desirable ... Turrill (1935) has suggested that while accepting the older invaluable taxonomy, based on structure, and conveniently designated "alpha", it is possible to glimpse a far-distant taxonomy built upon as wide a basis of morphological and physiological facts as possible, and one in which "place is found for all observational and experimental data relating, even if indirectly, to the constitution, subdivision, origin, and behaviour of species and other taxonomic groups". Ideals can, it may be said, never be completely realized. They have, however, a great value of acting as permanent stimulants, and if we have some, even vague, ideal of an "omega" taxonomy we may progress a little way down the Greek alphabet. Some of us please ourselves by thinking we are now groping in a "beta" taxonomy.[22]
Turrill thus explicitly excludes from alpha taxonomy various areas of study that he includes within taxonomy as a whole, such as ecology, physiology, genetics, and cytology. He further excludes phylogenetic reconstruction from alpha taxonomy.[23]
Later authors have used the term in a different sense, to mean the delimitation of species (not subspecies or taxa of other ranks), using whatever investigative techniques are available, and including sophisticated computational or laboratory techniques.[24][20] Thus, Ernst Mayr in 1968 defined "beta taxonomy" as the classification of ranks higher than species.[25]
An understanding of the biological meaning of variation and of the evolutionary origin of groups of related species is even more important for the second stage of taxonomic activity, the sorting of species into groups of relatives ("taxa") and their arrangement in a hierarchy of higher categories. This activity is what the term classification denotes; it is also referred to as "beta taxonomy".
Microtaxonomy and macrotaxonomy
How species should be defined in a particular group of organisms gives rise to practical and theoretical problems that are referred to as the species problem. The scientific work of deciding how to define species has been called microtaxonomy.[26][27][20] By extension, macrotaxonomy is the study of groups at the higher taxonomic ranks subgenus and above,[20] or simply in clades that include more than one taxon considered a species, expressed in terms of phylogenetic nomenclature.[28]
History
While some descriptions of taxonomic history attempt to date taxonomy to ancient civilizations, a truly scientific attempt to classify organisms did not occur until the 18th century, with the possible exception of Aristotle, whose works hint at a taxonomy.[29][30] Earlier works were primarily descriptive and focused on plants that were useful in agriculture or medicine.
There are a number of stages in this scientific thinking. Early taxonomy was based on arbitrary criteria, the so-called "artificial systems", including Linnaeus's system of sexual classification for plants (Linnaeus's 1735 classification of animals was entitled "Systema Naturae" ("the System of Nature"), implying that he, at least, believed that it was more than an "artificial system").
Later came systems based on a more complete consideration of the characteristics of taxa, referred to as "natural systems", such as those of de Jussieu (1789), de Candolle (1813) and Bentham and Hooker (1862–1863). These classifications described empirical patterns and were pre-evolutionary in thinking.
The publication of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859) led to a new explanation for classifications, based on evolutionary relationships. This was the concept of phyletic systems, from 1883 onwards. This approach was typified by those of Eichler (1883) and Engler (1886–1892).
The advent of cladistic methodology in the 1970s led to classifications based on the sole criterion of monophyly, supported by the presence of synapomorphies. Since then, the evidentiary basis has been expanded with data from molecular genetics that for the most part complements traditional morphology.[31][page needed][32][page needed][33][page needed]
Pre-Linnaean
Early taxonomists
Naming and classifying human surroundings likely began with the onset of language. Distinguishing poisonous plants from edible plants is integral to the survival of human communities. Medicinal plant illustrations show up in Egyptian wall paintings from c. 1500 BC, indicating that the uses of different species were understood and that a basic taxonomy was in place.[34]
Ancient times
Organisms were first classified by Aristotle (Greece, 384–322 BC) during his stay on the Island of Lesbos.[35][36][37] He classified beings by their parts, or in modern terms attributes, such as having live birth, having four legs, laying eggs, having blood, or being warm-bodied.[38] He divided all living things into two groups: plants and animals.[36]
Some of his groups of animals, such as Anhaima (animals without blood, translated as invertebrates) and Enhaima (animals with blood, roughly the vertebrates), as well as groups like the sharks and cetaceans, are commonly used.[39][40][41]
His student Theophrastus (Greece, 370–285 BC) carried on this tradition, mentioning some 500 plants and their uses in his Historia Plantarum. Several plant genera can be traced back to Theophrastus, such as Cornus, Crocus, and Narcissus.[36]
Medieval
Taxonomy in the Middle Ages was largely based on the Aristotelian system,[38] with additions concerning the philosophical and existential order of creatures. This included concepts such as the great chain of being in the Western scholastic tradition,[38] again deriving ultimately from Aristotle.
The Aristotelian system did not classify plants or fungi, due to the lack of microscopes at the time,[37] as his ideas were based on arranging the complete world in a single continuum, as per the scala naturae (the Natural Ladder).[36] This, as well, was taken into consideration in the great chain of being.[36]
Advances were made by scholars such as Procopius, Timotheus of Gaza, Demetrios Pepagomenos, and Thomas Aquinas. Medieval thinkers used abstract philosophical and logical categorizations more suited to abstract philosophy than to pragmatic taxonomy.[36]
Renaissance and early modern
During the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment, categorizing organisms became more prevalent,[36] and taxonomic works became ambitious enough to replace the ancient texts. This is sometimes credited to the development of sophisticated optical lenses, which allowed the morphology of organisms to be studied in much greater detail.
One of the earliest authors to take advantage of this leap in technology was the Italian physician Andrea Cesalpino (1519–1603), who has been called "the first taxonomist".[42] His magnum opus De Plantis came out in 1583, and described more than 1,500 plant species.[43][44] Two large plant families that he first recognized are in use: the Asteraceae and Brassicaceae.[45]
In the 17th century, John Ray (England, 1627–1705) wrote many important taxonomic works.[37] Arguably his greatest accomplishment was Methodus Plantarum Nova (1682),[46] in which he published details of over 18,000 plant species. At the time, his classifications were perhaps the most complex yet produced by any taxonomist, as he based his taxa on many combined characters.
The next major taxonomic works were produced by Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (France, 1656–1708).[47] His work from 1700, Institutiones Rei Herbariae, included more than 9,000 species in 698 genera, which directly influenced Linnaeus, as it was the text he used as a young student.[34]
Linnaean era
The Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778)[38] ushered in a new era of taxonomy. With his major works Systema Naturae 1st Edition in 1735,[48] Species Plantarum in 1753,[49] and Systema Naturae 10th Edition,[50] he revolutionized modern taxonomy. His works implemented a standardized binomial naming system for animal and plant species,[51] which proved to be an elegant solution to a chaotic and disorganized taxonomic literature. He not only introduced the standard of class, order, genus, and species, but also made it possible to identify plants and animals from his book, by using the smaller parts of the flower (known as the Linnaean system).[51]
Plant and animal taxonomists regard Linnaeus' work as the "starting point" for valid names (at 1753 and 1758 respectively).[52] Names published before these dates are referred to as "pre-Linnaean", and not considered valid (with the exception of spiders published in Svenska Spindlar[53]). Even taxonomic names published by Linnaeus himself before these dates are considered pre-Linnaean.[34]
The digital era of taxonomy
Modern taxonomy is heavily influenced by technology such as DNA sequencing, bioinformatics, databases, and imaging.
Modern system of classification
A pattern of groups nested within groups was specified by Linnaeus' classifications of plants and animals, and these patterns began to be represented as dendrograms of the animal and plant kingdoms toward the end of the 18th century, well before Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species was published.[37] The pattern of the "Natural System" did not entail a generating process, such as evolution, but may have implied it, inspiring early transmutationist thinkers. Among early works exploring the idea of a transmutation of species were Zoonomia in 1796 by Erasmus Darwin (Charles Darwin's grandfather), and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck's Philosophie zoologique of 1809.[20] The idea was popularized in the Anglophone world by the speculative but widely read Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, published anonymously by Robert Chambers in 1844.[54]
With Darwin's theory, a general acceptance quickly appeared that a classification should reflect the Darwinian principle of common descent.[55] Tree of life representations became popular in scientific works, with known fossil groups incorporated. One of the first modern groups tied to fossil ancestors was birds.[56] Using the then newly discovered fossils of Archaeopteryx and Hesperornis, Thomas Henry Huxley pronounced that they had evolved from dinosaurs, a group formally named by Richard Owen in 1842.[57][58] The resulting description, that of dinosaurs "giving rise to" or being "the ancestors of" birds, is the essential hallmark of evolutionary taxonomic thinking. As more and more fossil groups were found and recognized in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, palaeontologists worked to understand the history of animals through the ages by linking together known groups.[59] With the modern evolutionary synthesis of the early 1940s, an essentially modern understanding of the evolution of the major groups was in place. As evolutionary taxonomy is based on Linnaean taxonomic ranks, the two terms are largely interchangeable in modern use.[60]
The cladistic method has emerged since the 1960s.[55] In 1958, Julian Huxley used the term clade.[20] Later, in 1960, Cain and Harrison introduced the term cladistic.[20] The salient feature is arranging taxa in a hierarchical evolutionary tree, with the desired objective of all named taxa being monophyletic.[55] A taxon is called monophyletic if it includes all the descendants of an ancestral form.[61][62] Groups that have descendant groups removed from them are termed paraphyletic,[61] while groups representing more than one branch from the tree of life are called polyphyletic.[61][62] Monophyletic groups are recognized and diagnosed on the basis of synapomorphies, shared derived character states.[63]
Cladistic classifications are compatible with traditional Linnean taxonomy and the Codes of Zoological and Botanical nomenclature, to a certain extent.[64] An alternative system of nomenclature, the International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature or PhyloCode has been proposed, which regulates the formal naming of clades.[65][28][9] Linnaean ranks are optional and have no formal standing under the PhyloCode, which is intended to coexist with the current, rank-based codes.[28] While popularity of phylogenetic nomenclature has grown steadily in the last few decades,[9] it remains to be seen whether a majority of systematists will eventually adopt the PhyloCode or continue using the current systems of nomenclature that have been employed (and modified, but arguably not as much as some systematists wish)[66][67] for over 250 years.
Kingdoms and domains
Well before Linnaeus, plants and animals were considered separate Kingdoms.[68][unreliable source?] Linnaeus used this as the top rank, dividing the physical world into the vegetable, animal and mineral kingdoms. As advances in microscopy made the classification of microorganisms possible, the number of kingdoms increased, five- and six-kingdom systems being the most common.
Domains are a relatively new grouping. First proposed in 1977, Carl Woese's three-domain system was not generally accepted until later.[69] One main characteristic of the three-domain method is the separation of Archaea and Bacteria, previously grouped into the single kingdom Bacteria (a kingdom also sometimes called Monera),[68] with the Eukaryota for all organisms whose cells contain a nucleus.[70] A small number of scientists include a sixth kingdom, Archaea, but do not accept the domain method.[68]
Thomas Cavalier-Smith, who published extensively on the classification of protists, in 2002[71] proposed that the Neomura, the clade that groups together the Archaea and Eucarya, would have evolved from Bacteria, more precisely from Actinomycetota. His 2004 classification treated the archaeobacteria as part of a subkingdom of the kingdom Bacteria, i.e., he rejected the three-domain system entirely.[72] Stefan Luketa in 2012 proposed a five "dominion" system, adding Prionobiota (acellular and without nucleic acid) and Virusobiota (acellular but with nucleic acid) to the traditional three domains.[73]
Linnaeus 1735[74] |
Haeckel 1866[75] |
Chatton 1925[76] |
Copeland 1938[77] |
Whittaker 1969[78] |
Woese et al. 1990[79] |
Cavalier-Smith 1998,[72] 2015[80] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 kingdoms | 3 kingdoms | 2 empires | 4 kingdoms | 5 kingdoms | 3 domains | 2 empires, 6/7 kingdoms |
(not treated) | Protista | Prokaryota | Monera | Monera | Bacteria | Bacteria |
Archaea | Archaea (2015) | |||||
Eukaryota | Protoctista | Protista | Eucarya | "Protozoa" | ||
"Chromista" | ||||||
Vegetabilia | Plantae | Plantae | Plantae | Plantae | ||
Fungi | Fungi | |||||
Animalia | Animalia | Animalia | Animalia | Animalia |
Recent comprehensive classifications
Partial classifications exist for many individual groups of organisms and are revised and replaced as new information becomes available; however, comprehensive, published treatments of most or all life are rarer; recent examples are that of Adl et al., 2012 and 2019,[81][82] which covers eukaryotes only with an emphasis on protists, and Ruggiero et al., 2015,[83] covering both eukaryotes and prokaryotes to the rank of Order, although both exclude fossil representatives.[83] A separate compilation (Ruggiero, 2014)[84] covers extant taxa to the rank of Family. Other, database-driven treatments include the Encyclopedia of Life, the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the NCBI taxonomy database, the Interim Register of Marine and Nonmarine Genera, the Open Tree of Life, and the Catalogue of Life. The Paleobiology Database is a resource for fossils.
Application
Biological taxonomy is a sub-discipline of biology, and is generally practiced by biologists known as "taxonomists", though enthusiastic naturalists are also frequently involved in the publication of new taxa.[85] Because taxonomy aims to describe and organize life, the work conducted by taxonomists is essential for the study of biodiversity and the resulting field of conservation biology.[86][87]
Classifying organisms
Biological classification is a critical component of the taxonomic process. As a result, it informs the user as to what the relatives of the taxon are hypothesized to be. Biological classification uses taxonomic ranks, including among others (in order from most inclusive to least inclusive): domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, and strain.[88][note 1]
Taxonomic descriptions
The "definition" of a taxon is encapsulated by its description or its diagnosis or by both combined. There are no set rules governing the definition of taxa, but the naming and publication of new taxa is governed by sets of rules.[8] In zoology, the nomenclature for the more commonly used ranks (superfamily to subspecies), is regulated by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN Code).[89] In the fields of phycology, mycology, and botany, the naming of taxa is governed by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN).[90]
The initial description of a taxon involves five main requirements:[91]
- The taxon must be given a name based on the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet (a binomial for new species, or uninomial for other ranks).
- The name must be unique (i.e. not a homonym).
- The description must be based on at least one name-bearing type specimen.
- It should include statements about appropriate attributes either to describe (define) the taxon or to differentiate it from other taxa (the diagnosis, ICZN Code, Article 13.1.1, ICN, Article 38, which may or may not be based on morphology[92]). Both codes deliberately separate defining the content of a taxon (its circumscription) from defining its name.
- These first four requirements must be published in a work that is obtainable in numerous identical copies, as a permanent scientific record.
However, often much more information is included, like the geographic range of the taxon, ecological notes, chemistry, behavior, etc. How researchers arrive at their taxa varies: depending on the available data, and resources, methods vary from simple quantitative or qualitative comparisons of striking features, to elaborate computer analyses of large amounts of DNA sequence data.[93]
Author citation
An "authority" may be placed after a scientific name.[94] The authority is the name of the scientist or scientists who first validly published the name.[94] For example, in 1758, Linnaeus gave the Asian elephant the scientific name Elephas maximus, so the name is sometimes written as "Elephas maximus Linnaeus, 1758".[95] The names of authors are often abbreviated: the abbreviation L., for Linnaeus, is commonly used. In botany, there is, in fact, a regulated list of standard abbreviations (see list of botanists by author abbreviation).[96] The system for assigning authorities differs slightly between botany and zoology.[8] However, it is standard that if the genus of a species has been changed since the original description, the original authority's name is placed in parentheses.[97]
Phenetics
In phenetics, also known as taximetrics, or numerical taxonomy, organisms are classified based on overall similarity, regardless of their phylogeny or evolutionary relationships.[20] It results in a measure of hypergeometric "distance" between taxa. Phenetic methods have become relatively rare in modern times, largely superseded by cladistic analyses, as phenetic methods do not distinguish shared ancestral (or plesiomorphic) traits from shared derived (or apomorphic) traits.[98] However, certain phenetic methods, such as neighbor joining, have persisted, as rapid estimators of relationships when more advanced methods (such as Bayesian inference) are too computationally expensive.[99]
Databases
Modern taxonomy uses database technologies to search and catalogue classifications and their documentation.[100] While there is no commonly used database, there are comprehensive databases such as the Catalogue of Life, which attempts to list every documented species.[101] The catalogue listed 1.64 million species for all kingdoms as of April 2016[update], claiming coverage of more than three-quarters of the estimated species known to modern science.[102]
See also
- Automated species identification
- Bacterial taxonomy
- Cluster analysis
- Consortium for the Barcode of Life
- Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities
- Genetypes
- Glossary of scientific naming
- Identification (biology)
- Incertae sedis
- Open Tree of Life
- Parataxonomy
- Phenogram
- Set theory
- Taxonomy (general)
- Virus classification
Notes
- ^ This ranking system, except for "Strain", can be remembered by the mnemonic "Do Kings Play Chess On Fine Glass Sets?"
References
- ^ a b Wilkins, J. S. (5 February 2011). "What is systematics and what is taxonomy?". Archived from the original on 27 August 2016. Retrieved 21 August 2016.
- ^ Judd, W. S.; Campbell, C. S.; Kellogg, E. A.; Stevens, P. F.; Donoghue, M. J. (2007). "Taxonomy". Plant Systematics: A Phylogenetic Approach (3rd ed.). Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.
- ^ Simpson, Michael G. (2010). "Chapter 1 Plant Systematics: an Overview". Plant Systematics (2nd ed.). Academic Press. ISBN 9780123743800.
- ^ Kirk, P. M.; Cannon, P. F.; Minter, D. W.; Stalpers, J. A., eds. (2008). "Taxonomy". Dictionary of the Fungi (10th ed.). CABI.
- ^ Walker, P. M. B., ed. (1988). The Wordsworth Dictionary of Science and Technology. W. R. Chambers Ltd. and Cambridge University Press.
- ^ a b Lawrence, E. (2005). Henderson's Dictionary Of Biology. Pearson/Prentice Hall. ISBN 9780131273849.
- ^ Wheeler, Quentin D. (2004). Godfray, H. C. J.; Knapp, S. (eds.). "Taxonomic triage and the poverty of phylogeny". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 359: Taxonomy for the twenty-first century (1444): 571–583. doi:10.1098/rstb.2003.1452. ISSN 0962-8436. PMC 1693342. PMID 15253345.
- ^ a b c "Nomenclature, Names, and Taxonomy". Intermountain Herbarium. Utah State University. 2005. Archived from the original on 23 November 2016.
- ^ a b c Laurin, Michel (3 August 2023). The Advent of PhyloCode: The Continuing Evolution of Biological Nomenclature. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp. xv + 209. doi:10.1201/9781003092827. ISBN 9781003092827. Archived from the original on 5 September 2023. Retrieved 19 September 2023.
- ^ Michener, Charles D.; Corliss, John O.; Cowan, Richard S.; Raven, Peter H.; Sabrosky, Curtis W.; Squires, Donald S.; Wharton, G. W. (1970). Systematics In Support of Biological Research. Washington, DC: Division of Biology and Agriculture, National Research Council.
- ^ Small, Ernest (1989). "Systematics of Biological Systematics (Or, Taxonomy of Taxonomy)". Taxon. 38 (3): 335–356. doi:10.2307/1222265. JSTOR 1222265.
- ^ Singh, Gurcharan (2004). Plant systematics: An integrated approach. Science Publishers. p. 20. ISBN 9781578083510 – via Google Books.
- ^ Wilkins, J. S. "What is systematics and what is taxonomy?". EvolvingThoughts.net. Archived from the original on 27 August 2016.
- ^ Brusca, R. C.; Brusca, G. J. (2003). Invertebrates (2nd ed.). Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates. p. 27.
- ^ Fortey, Richard (2008). Dry Store Room No. 1: The Secret Life of the Natural History Museum. London: Harper Perennial. ISBN 9780007209897.
- ^ Maxted, Nigel (1992). "Towards Defining a Taxonomic Revision Methodology". Taxon. 41 (4): 653–660. doi:10.2307/1222391. JSTOR 1222391.
- ^ Hennig, Willi (January 1965). "Phylogenetic Systematics". Annual Review of Entomology. 10 (1): 97–116. doi:10.1146/annurev.en.10.010165.000525. ISSN 0066-4170. Archived from the original on 13 November 2023. Retrieved 19 September 2023.
- ^ Mayr, Ernst (1991). Principles of Systematic Zoology. New York: McGraw-Hill. p. 159.
- ^ Mayr, Ernst (1991), p. 162.
- ^ a b c d e f g h "Taxonomy: Meaning, Levels, Periods and Role". Biology Discussion. 27 May 2016. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Rosselló-Mora, Ramon; Amann, Rudolf (1 January 2001). "The species concept for prokaryotes". FEMS Microbiology Reviews. 25 (1): 39–67. doi:10.1111/j.1574-6976.2001.tb00571.x. ISSN 1574-6976. PMID 11152940.
- ^ a b Turrill 1938.
- ^ Turrill 1938, pp. 365–366.
- ^ Steyskal, G. C. (1965). "Trend curves of the rate of species description in zoology". Science. 149 (3686): 880–882. Bibcode:1965Sci...149..880S. doi:10.1126/science.149.3686.880. PMID 17737388. S2CID 36277653.
- ^ Mayr, Ernst (9 February 1968). "The Role of Systematics in Biology: The study of all aspects of the diversity of life is one of the most important concerns in biology". Science. 159 (3815): 595–599. Bibcode:1968Sci...159..595M. doi:10.1126/science.159.3815.595. PMID 4886900.
- ^ Mayr, Ernst (1982). "Chapter 6: Microtaxonomy, the science of species". The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674364462. Archived from the original on 3 July 2023. Retrieved 15 September 2017.
- ^ "Result of Your Query". biological-concepts.com. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ a b c Cantino, Philip D.; de Queiroz, Kevin (29 April 2020). International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature (PhyloCode): A Phylogenetic Code of Biological Nomenclature. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp. xl + 149. ISBN 978-0429821356. Archived from the original on 14 October 2023. Retrieved 19 September 2023.
- ^ Voultsiadou, Eleni; Vafidis, Dimitris (1 January 2007). "Marine invertebrate diversity in Aristotle's zoology". Contributions to Zoology. 76 (2): 103–120. doi:10.1163/18759866-07602004. ISSN 1875-9866. Archived from the original on 25 April 2023. Retrieved 19 September 2023.
- ^ Voultsiadou, Eleni; Gerovasileiou, Vasilis; Vandepitte, Leen; Ganias, Kostas; Arvanitidis, Christos (2017). "Aristotle's scientific contributions to the classification, nomenclature and distribution of marine organisms". Mediterranean Marine Science. 18 (3): 468–478. doi:10.12681/mms.13874. ISSN 1791-6763.
- ^ Datta 1988.
- ^ Stace 1989.
- ^ Stuessy 2009.
- ^ a b c Manktelow, M. (2010). "History of Taxonomy" (PDF). Dept. of Systematic Biology, Uppsala University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 May 2015.
- ^ Mayr, Ernst (1982). The Growth of Biological Thought. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- ^ a b c d e f g "History of Taxonomy". Palaeos. Archived from the original on 31 March 2017.
- ^ a b c d "taxonomy | biology". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ a b c d "Biology 101, Ch 20". cbs.dtu.dk. 23 March 1998. Archived from the original on 28 June 2017.
- ^ Leroi, Armand Marie (2014). The Lagoon: How Aristotle Invented Science. Bloomsbury. pp. 384–395. ISBN 9781408836224.
- ^ von Lieven, Alexander Fürst; Humar, Marcel (2008). "A Cladistic Analysis of Aristotle's Animal Groups in the "Historia animalium"". History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. 30 (2): 227–262. ISSN 0391-9714. JSTOR 23334371. PMID 19203017. Archived from the original on 27 November 2022. Retrieved 19 September 2023.
- ^ Laurin, Michel; Humar, Marcel (2022). "Phylogenetic signal in characters from Aristotle's History of Animals". Comptes Rendus Palevol (in French). 21 (1): 1–16. doi:10.5852/cr-palevol2022v21a1.
- ^ "Andrea Cesalpino | Italian physician, philosopher, and botanist". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Cesalpino, Andrea; Marescotti, Giorgio (1583). De plantis libri XVI. Florence: Apud Georgium Marescottum – via Internet Archive.
- ^ "Andrea Cesalpino | Italian physician, philosopher, and botanist". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Jaime, Prohens (2010). International Edition Vegetables I: Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Chenopodicaceae, and Cucurbitaceae (Handbook of Plant Breeding). Springer. ISBN 9781441924742.
- ^ John, Ray (1682). Methodus plantarum nova [New Method of Plants] (in Latin). impensis Henrici Faithorne & Joannis Kersey, ad insigne Rofæ Coemeterio D. Pauli. Archived from the original on 29 September 2017.
- ^ "Joseph Pitton de Tournefort | French botanist and physician". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Linnaeus, Carl (1735). Systema naturae, sive regna tria naturae systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera, & species (in Latin). Leiden: Haak.
- ^ Linnaeus, Carl (1753). Species Plantarum (in Latin). Stockholm.
- ^ Linnaeus, Carl (1758). Systema naturae, sive regna tria naturae systematice proposita per classes, ordines, genera, & species (in Latin) (10th ed.). Leiden: Haak.
- ^ a b "taxonomy – The Linnaean system | biology". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Donk, M. A. (December 1957). "Typification and later starting-points" (PDF). Taxon. 6 (9): 245–256. doi:10.2307/1217493. JSTOR 1217493. Archived (PDF) from the original on 18 May 2015.
- ^ Carl, Clerck; Carl, Bergquist; Eric, Borg; L., Gottman; Lars, Salvius (1757). Svenska spindlar [Swedish Spiders] (in Swedish). Literis Laur. Salvii. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017.
- ^ Secord, James A. (2000). Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226744100. Archived from the original on 16 May 2008.
- ^ a b c "taxonomy – Classification since Linnaeus | biology". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Black, Riley (7 December 2010). "Thomas Henry Huxley and the Dinobirds". Smithsonian Magazine. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Archived from the original on 10 November 2023. Retrieved 10 November 2023.
- ^ Huxley, Thomas Henry (1876). "Lectures on Evolution". Collected Essays. Vol. IV. pp. 46–138. Archived from the original on 28 June 2011. Original text w/ figures. First published as New York Tribune, Extra no. 36.
- ^ "Thomas Henry Huxley | British biologist". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 6 February 2018.
- ^ Rudwick, M. J. S. (1985). The Meaning of Fossils: Episodes in the History of Palaeontology. University of Chicago Press. p. 24. ISBN 9780226731032.
- ^ Paterlini, Marta (September 2007). "There shall be order. The legacy of Linnaeus in the age of molecular biology". EMBO Reports. 8 (9): 814–816. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7401061. PMC 1973966. PMID 17767191.
- ^ a b c Taylor, Mike (17 July 2003). "What do terms like monophyletic, paraphyletic and polyphyletic mean?". miketaylor.org.uk. Archived from the original on 1 August 2010.
- ^ a b "Polyphyletic vs. Monophyletic". National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ Brower, Andrew V. Z.; Schuh, Randall T. (2021). Biological Systematics: Principles and Applications (3rd ed.). Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. p. 13.
- ^ Schuh, Randall T. (2003). "The Linnaean system and its 250-year persistence". The Botanical Review. 69 (1): 59. doi:10.1663/0006-8101(2003)069[0059:TLSAIY]2.0.CO;2.
- ^ Queiroz, Philip D.; de Cantino, Kevin. "The PhyloCode". Ohio.edu. Archived from the original on 10 May 2016.
- ^ Dubois, Alain (1 February 2007). "Naming taxa from cladograms: A cautionary tale". Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 42 (2): 317–330. Bibcode:2007MolPE..42..317D. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2006.06.007. ISSN 1055-7903. PMID 16949307. Archived from the original on 13 November 2023. Retrieved 21 October 2023.
- ^ Dubois, Alain; Bauer, Aaron M.; Ceríaco, Luis M. P.; Dusoulier, François; Frétey, Thierry; Löbl, Ivan; Lorvelec, Olivier; Ohler, Annemarie; Stopiglia, Renata; Aescht, Erna (17 December 2019). "The Linz Zoocode project: A set of new proposals regarding the terminology, the Principles and Rules of zoological nomenclature. First report of activities (2014‒2019)". Bionomina. 17 (1): 1–111. doi:10.11646/BIONOMINA.17.1.1.
- ^ a b c "Kingdom Classification of Living Organism". Biology Discussion. 2 December 2014. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017.
- ^ "Carl Woese | Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology". www.igb.Illinois.edu. Archived from the original on 28 April 2017.
- ^ Cracraft, Joel; Donaghue, Michael J., eds. (2004). Assembling the Tree of Life. Oxford University Press. pp. 45, 78, 555. ISBN 0195172345.
- ^ Cavalier-Smith, T. (March 2002). "The phagotrophic origin of eukaryotes and phylogenetic classification of Protozoa". International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 52 (Pt 2): 297–354. doi:10.1099/00207713-52-2-297. PMID 11931142. Archived from the original on 29 July 2017. Retrieved 21 November 2022.
- ^ a b Cavalier-Smith, T. (1998). "A revised six-kingdom system of life". Biological Reviews. 73 (3): 203–66. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1998.tb00030.x. PMID 9809012. S2CID 6557779.
- ^ Luketa, S. (2012). "New views on the megaclassification of life" (PDF). Protistology. 7 (4): 218–237. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 April 2015.
- ^ Linnaeus, C. (1735). Systemae Naturae, sive regna tria naturae, systematics proposita per classes, ordines, genera & species.
- ^ Haeckel, E. (1866). Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Reimer, Berlin.
- ^ Chatton, É. (1925). "Pansporella perplexa. Réflexions sur la biologie et la phylogénie des protozoaires". Annales des Sciences Naturelles - Zoologie et Biologie Animale. 10-VII: 1–84.
- ^ Copeland, H. (1938). "The kingdoms of organisms". Quarterly Review of Biology. 13 (4): 383–420. doi:10.1086/394568. S2CID 84634277.
- ^ Whittaker, R. H. (January 1969). "New concepts of kingdoms of organisms". Science. 163 (3863): 150–60. Bibcode:1969Sci...163..150W. doi:10.1126/science.163.3863.150. PMID 5762760.
- ^ Woese, C.; Kandler, O.; Wheelis, M. (1990). "Towards a natural system of organisms:proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 87 (12): 4576–9. Bibcode:1990PNAS...87.4576W. doi:10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576. PMC 54159. PMID 2112744.
- ^ Ruggiero, Michael A.; Gordon, Dennis P.; Orrell, Thomas M.; Bailly, Nicolas; Bourgoin, Thierry; Brusca, Richard C.; Cavalier-Smith, Thomas; Guiry, Michael D.; Kirk, Paul M.; Thuesen, Erik V. (2015). "A higher level classification of all living organisms". PLOS ONE. 10 (4): e0119248. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1019248R. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119248. PMC 4418965. PMID 25923521.
- ^ Adl, S. M.; Simpson, A. G. B.; Lane, C. E.; Lukeš, J.; Bass, D.; Bowser, S. S.; et al. (December 2015). "The revised classification of eukaryotes". Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. 59 (5): 429–493. doi:10.1111/j.1550-7408.2012.00644.x. PMC 3483872. PMID 23020233.
- ^ Adl, S. M.; Bass, D.; Lane, C. E.; Lukeš, J.; Schoch, C. L.; Smirnov, A.; et al. (2019). "Revisions to the classification, nomenclature, and diversity of eukaryotes". Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. 66 (1): 4–119. doi:10.1111/jeu.12691. PMC 6492006. PMID 30257078.
- ^ a b Ruggiero, Michael A.; Gordon, D. P.; Orrell, T. M.; Bailly, N.; Bourgoin, T.; Brusca, R. C.; et al. (2015). "A higher level classification of all living organisms". PLOS ONE. 10 (4): e0119248. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1019248R. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119248. PMC 4418965. PMID 25923521.
- ^ Döring, Markus (13 August 2015). "Families of Living Organisms (FALO)". GBIF. doi:10.15468/tfp6yv. Archived from the original on 2 March 2020. Retrieved 11 March 2020.
- ^ Jones, Benjamin (7 September 2017). "A Few Bad Scientists Are Threatening to Topple Taxonomy". Smithsonian. Archived from the original on 8 February 2019. Retrieved 24 February 2019.
- ^ "What is taxonomy?". London: Natural History Museum. Archived from the original on 1 October 2013. Retrieved 23 December 2017.
- ^ McNeely, Jeffrey A. (2002). "The role of taxonomy in conserving biodiversity" (PDF). Journal for Nature Conservation. 10 (3): 145–153. Bibcode:2002JNatC..10..145M. doi:10.1078/1617-1381-00015. S2CID 16953722. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 December 2017 – via Semantic Scholar.
- ^ "Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species". Mnemonic Device. Archived from the original on 6 June 2017.
- ^ "ICZN Code". AnimalBase. Archived from the original on 3 October 2022. Retrieved 8 April 2017.
- ^ "International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants". IAPT-Taxon.org. International Association for Plant Taxonomy. Archived from the original on 11 January 2013.
- ^ "How can I describe new species?". ICZN.org. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Archived from the original on 6 March 2012. Retrieved 21 May 2020.
- ^ Lawley, Jonathan W.; Gamero-Mora, Edgar; Maronna, Maximiliano M.; Chiaverano, Luciano M.; Stampar, Sérgio N.; Hopcroft, Russell R.; Collins, Allen G.; Morandini, André C. (19 September 2022). "Morphology is not always useful for diagnosis, and that's ok: Species hypotheses should not be bound to a class of data. Reply to Brown and Gibbons (S Afr J Sci. 2022;118(9/10), Art. #12590)". South African Journal of Science. 118 (9/10). doi:10.17159/sajs.2022/14495. ISSN 1996-7489. S2CID 252562185. Archived from the original on 20 October 2022. Retrieved 20 October 2022.
- ^ "Taxonomy – Evaluating taxonomic characters". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 22 April 2019.
- ^ a b "Editing Tip: Scientific Names of Species". AJE.com. American Journal Experts, Research Square Company. Archived from the original on 9 April 2017.
- ^ "Carolus Linnaeus: Classification, Taxonomy & Contributions to Biology – Video & Lesson Transcript". Study.com. Archived from the original on 9 April 2017.
- ^ Biocyclopedia.com. "Biological Classification". biocyclopedia.com. Archived from the original on 14 May 2017.
- ^ "Zoological nomenclature: a basic guide for non-taxonomist authors". Annelida.net. Archived from the original on 16 March 2017.
- ^ "Classification". North Carolina State University. Archived from the original on 14 April 2017. Retrieved 27 April 2017.
- ^ McDonald, David (Fall 2008). "Molecular Marker Glossary". University of Wyoming. Archived from the original on 10 June 2007.
- ^ Wood, Dylan; King, Margaret; Landis, Drew; Courtney, William; Wang, Runtang; Kelly, Ross; Turner, Jessica A.; Calhoun, Vince D. (26 August 2014). "Harnessing modern web application technology to create intuitive and efficient data visualization and sharing tools". Frontiers in Neuroinformatics. 8: 71. doi:10.3389/fninf.2014.00071. ISSN 1662-5196. PMC 4144441. PMID 25206330.
- ^ "About – The Plant List". theplantlist.org. Archived from the original on 21 June 2017. Retrieved 8 April 2017.
- ^ "About the Catalogue of Life: 2016 Annual Checklist". Catalogue of Life. Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). Archived from the original on 15 May 2016. Retrieved 22 May 2016.
Bibliography
- Datta, Subhash Chandra (1988). Systematic Botany (4 ed.). New Delhi: New Age International. ISBN 9788122400137. Archived from the original on 13 November 2023. Retrieved 25 January 2015.
- Stace, Clive A. (1989) [1980]. Plant taxonomy and biosystematics (2nd. ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521427852. Archived from the original on 13 January 2023. Retrieved 19 April 2015.
- Stuessy, Tod F. (2009). Plant Taxonomy: The Systematic Evaluation of Comparative Data. Columbia University Press. ISBN 9780231147125. Archived from the original on 13 November 2023. Retrieved 6 February 2014.
- Turrill, W. B. (1938). "The Expansion Of Taxonomy With Special Reference To Spermatophyta". Biological Reviews. 13 (4): 342–373. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1938.tb00522.x. S2CID 84905335.
- Wiley, Edward O.; Lieberman, Bruce S. (2011). Phylogenetics: Theory and Practice of Phylogenetic Systematics (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9780470905968.
External links
- What is taxonomy? at the Natural History Museum London
- Taxonomy at NCBI the National Center for Biotechnology Information
- Taxonomy at UniProt the Universal Protein Resource
- ITIS the Integrated Taxonomic Information System
- CETaF the Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities
- Wikispecies free species directory
- Biological classification. Archived 13 August 2020 at the Wayback Machine