Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T20:28:36.952Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - The relational view of phylogenetic hypotheses and what it tells us on the phylogeny/classification relation problem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2016

By
Stéphane Prin
Edited by
David Williams ,
Michael Schmitt  and
Quentin Wheeler
David Williams
Affiliation:
Natural History Museum, London
Michael Schmitt
Affiliation:
Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald, Germany
Quentin Wheeler
Affiliation:
State University of New York
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Future of Phylogenetic Systematics
The Legacy of Willi Hennig
 , pp. 431 - 468
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashlock, P.D. (1979). An evolutionary systematist’s view of classification. Systematic Zoology, 28, 441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandelt, H-J. and Dress, A. (1986). Reconstructing the shape of a tree from observed dissimilarity data. Advances in Applied Mathematics, 7, 309–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beatty, J. (1982). Classes and cladists. Systematic Zoology, 31, 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buck, R.C. and Hull, D.L. (1966). The logical structure of the Linnaean hierarchy. Systematic Zoology, 15, 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colonius, H. and Schulze, H.H. (1981). Tree structures for proximity data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Davey, B.A. and Priestley, H.A. (2002). Introduction to Lattices and Order, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dayrat, B. (2005). Ancestor–descendant relationship and the reconstruction of the Tree of Life. Paleobiology, 31, 347–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobson, A.J. (1974). Unrooted trees for numerical taxonomy. Journal of Applied Probability, 11, 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estabrook, G.F. (1997). Ancestor–descendant relations and incompatible data. In Mathematical Hierarchies and Biology, ed. Mirkin, B., McMorris, F.R., Robert, F.S. and Rzhetsky, A.. DIMACS series in discrete mathematics and theoretical computer sciences, 37, 1–28. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
Farris, J.S. (1979). The information content of the phylogenetic system. Systematic Zoology, 28, 483–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farris, J.S., Kluge, A.G. and Eckardt, M.J. (1970). A numerical approach to phylogenetic systematics. Systematic Zoology, 19, 172—189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felsenstein, J. 2004. Inferring Phylogenies. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. (1965). Phylogenetic systematics. Annual Review of Entomology, 10, 97–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennig, W. (1966). Phylogenetic Systematics. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Hennig, W. (1975). “Cladistic analysis or cladistic classification?” A reply to Ernst Mayr. Systematic Zoology, 24, 244–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D.L. (1970). Contemporaries systematic philosophies. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1, 19–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D.L. (1979). The limits of cladism. Systematic Zoology, 28, 416–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D.L. (1986). Les fondements philosophiques de la classification biologique. In L’Ordre et la Diversité du Vivant, ed. P. Tassy. Paris: Fayard, pp. 161–203.Google Scholar
Hull, D.L. (2001). The role of theories in biological systematics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Sciences Part C: Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 32, 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jardine, N. (1969). A logical basis for biological classification. Systematic Zoology, 18, 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluge, A.G. (2002). Distinguishing “or” from “and” and the case for historical identification. Cladistics, 18, 585–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lecointre, G. and Le Guyader, H. (2001). Classification phylogénétique du vivant, 1st edition. Paris: Belin.Google Scholar
Løvtrup, S. (1988). La systématique et l’évolution de Lamarck aux théoriciens modernes. Biosystema, 3. Paris: Société Française de Systématique.Google Scholar
Matile, L., Tassy, P. and Goujet, D. (2004). Introduction à la systématique zoologique: concepts, principes, méthodes, 2nd edition. Biosystema, 1. Paris: Société Française de Systématique.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. (1974). Cladistic analysis or cladistic classification? Zeitschrift fuer Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung, 12, 94–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E. (1981). Biological classification: toward a synthesis of opposite methodologies. Science, 214, 510–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E. (1986). La systématique évolutionniste et les quatre étapes du processus de classification. In L’Ordre et la Diversité du Vivant, ed. P. Tassy. Paris: Fayard, , pp. 145–160.Google Scholar
McMorris, F.R. and Powers, R.C. (2003). The Arrovian Program from weak orders to hierarchical and tree-like relations. In Bioconsensus, ed. Janowitz, M.F., Lapointe, F.J., McMorris, F.R., Mirkin, B. and Robert, F.S.. DIMACS series in discrete mathematics and theoretical computer sciences, 61, 37–45. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minaka, N. (1993). Cladistics and biogeographic methods: Cladograms, components, and parsimony. Bulletin of the Biogeographical Society of Japan, 48, 1–27.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. (1970). Outline of a theory of comparative biology. Systematic Zoology, 19, 373–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, G. (1971). “Cladism” as a philosophy of classification. Systematic Zoology, 20, 373–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, G. (1972). Phylogenetic relationship and classification. Systematic Zoology, 21, 227–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, G. (1973). Classification as an expression of phylogenetic relationships. Systematic Zoology, 22, 344–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, G. (1974). Darwin-Hennig classification: a reply to Ernst Mayr. Systematic Zoology, 23, 452–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, G. (1989). Species and taxa: systematics and evolution. In Speciation and its consequences, ed. Otte, D. and Endler, J.A.. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, pp. 60–81.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. and Ladiges, P.Y. (1992). Information content and fractional weight of three-item statements. Systematic Biology, 41, 490–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, G. and Platnick, N.Y. (1981). Systematics and biogeography: cladistics and vicariance. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Platnick, N.I. (1979). Philosophy and the transformation of cladistics. Systematic Zoology, 28, 537–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pleijel, F. and Rouse, G.W. (2000). Least-inclusive taxonomic unit: a new taxonomic concept for biology. Proceeding of the Royal Society of London, series B: Biological Sciences, 267, 627–636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ridley, M. (1989). Principles of classification. In Philosophy of Biology, ed. Ruse, M., New York: Macmillan, pp. 167–179.Google Scholar
Rieppel, O. (2005). Des racines de positivisme logique dans la philosophie empiriocritique de Hennig. In Philosophie de la systématique, ed. Deleporte, P. and Lecointre, G., Biosystema, 24, Paris: Société Française de Systématique, pp. 9–22.Google Scholar
Roman, S. (2008). Lattices and Ordered Sets. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Sneath, P.H.A. and Sokal, R.R. (1973). Numerical Taxonomy. The Principles and Practice of Numerical Classification. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman and Co.Google Scholar
Sokal, R.R. (1975). Mayr on cladism-and his critics. Systematic Zoology, 24, 257–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R.R. and Sneath, P.H.A. (1963). Principles of numerical taxonomy. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman and Co.Google Scholar
Stoll, R.R. (1963). Set theory and logic (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Freeman and Co.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1960). Axiomatic set theory. New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Tassy, P. (2005). Fait et théorie: Quelles connaissances de base pour la cladistique structurale? In Philosophie de la Systématique, ed. Deleporte, P. and Lecointre, G., Biosystema, 24, Paris: Société Française de Systématique, pp. 63–74.Google Scholar
Williams, D.M. and Ebach, M.C. (2008). Foundations of Systematics and Biogeography. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, P.A. (1992). Confusion in cladism. Synthese, 91, 135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaragüeta Bagils, R. (2011). Ancêtre. In L’arbre du vivant existe-il? ed. Malécot, V., Léger, N. and Tassy, P., Biosystema, 28, Paris: Société Française de Systématique, pp. 41–62.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×