THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROBOSCIDEA: HOW MANY CLADISTIC CLASSIFICATIONS?
- 29 February 1988
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Cladistics
- Vol. 4 (1), 43-57
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.1988.tb00467.x
Abstract
— Hennig conceived a method to build a “phylogenetic system”, with the stipulation that a “properly drawn phylogenetic tree must be directly translatable into the language of phylogenetic systematics”. Consequently, this system could be the general reference system of biology. A review of the classificatory technical improvements, conventions and rules which have been proposed for the past twenty years together with their application to the classification of the Proboscidea, leads to the conclusion that more than one formal system can be built upon one given cladogram. As words are used more frequently for communication than diagrams, schemes or graphs, the “general reference system of biology1‘ remains somewhere in Utopia. The “phylogenetic system” is rather more synonymous with a cladogram than with a written classification.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- The primitive eutherian dental formulaJournal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 1986
- Echinoderms, Babel and the Confusion of NomenclatureSystematic Zoology, 1986
- Analyse cladistique numérique et analyse de parcimonie;l'exemple des ElephantidaeGeobios, 1986
- Les principales dichotomies dans l'histoire des proboscidea (mammalia): Une approche phylogénétiqueGeobios, 1982
- An Annotated Linnaean Hierarchy, with Comments on Natural Taxa and Competing SystemsSystematic Zoology, 1979
- Phylogenetic Classification of Fossils with Recent SpeciesSystematic Zoology, 1976
- Phylogenetic Models and ClassificationSystematic Zoology, 1974
- Phylogenetic Relationship and ClassificationSystematic Zoology, 1972
- Phylogenetic SystematicsAnnual Review of Entomology, 1965
- The Principles of Classification and a Classification of MammalsJournal of Mammalogy, 1946