The Principles Applied in Determining the Hierarchic Level of the Higher Categories of Ephemeroptera

1962 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 22 ◽  
Author(s):  
George F. Edmunds
Keyword(s):  
Hierarchic Level ◽  
Higher Categories

Taxonomic concepts and superfluity in bivalve nomenclature

1978 ◽  
Vol 284 (1001) ◽  
pp. 417-424 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Fossil Record ◽  
Anatomical Reconstruction ◽  
Occam’S Razor ◽  
Human Tendency ◽  
Invertebrate Animals ◽  
Higher Categories ◽  
Occam's Razor

Among the classes of invertebrate animals, the Bivalvia, with its extremely long fossil record and its preserved characters, which permit inferential anatomical reconstruction, comprises a group especially fit for phyletic analysis. Ideal for the investigation of the dynamics of speciation and the evolution of higher categories, bivalves represent a taxonomic unit whose systematics suffer from certain weaknesses. The relative narrowness of the anagenetic distances between lineages and the all-too-human tendency both to proliferate nomina and to elevate taxa partially obfuscate reality. The taxonomy of the Bivalvia is threatened by a cloying nomenclature both at specific and higher categorical levels. Reappraisal of various, recently proposed, systematic arrangements and judicious application of Occam’s Razor may allay the malaise of superfluity and promise the elaboration of a phyletically meaningful but somewhat simplified, utilitarian classification.

Cenozoic Birds

Paleobiology ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Feduccia
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Physiology ◽  
Aesthetic Appeal ◽  
Subspecies Level ◽  
Evolutionary Thought ◽  
Living Species ◽  
Higher Categories ◽  
Phylogeny And Evolution

Birds have traditionally been termed the best known group of vertebrates. This cliché, however, relates to the fact that living species are well described, even to the subspecies level. Birds are well known because they are diurnal (therefore easily observed) and because of their aesthetic appeal—birds are beautiful. Because of this appeal, birds have been subject to persistent scrutiny by amateur and professional naturalists alike, and their study has consequently contributed to the development of not only evolutionary thought, but also such diverse fields as ecology, behavior and even comparative physiology. However, while these disciplines have advanced, our understanding of bird phylogeny and evolution has simply not kept pace and the relationships of the higher categories of birds are still very poorly understood.

scholarly journals Homomorphisms of higher categories

2010 ◽  
Vol 224 (6) ◽  
pp. 2269-2311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Garner
Keyword(s):  
Higher Categories

scholarly journals Rapid action in the Palaeogene, the relationship between phenotypic and taxonomic diversification in Coenozoic mammals

2013 ◽  
Vol 280 (1750) ◽  
pp. 20122244 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Raia ◽  
F. Carotenuto ◽  
F. Passaro ◽  
P. Piras ◽  
D. Fulgione ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Size ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Species Level ◽  
Phenotypic Evolution ◽  
Diversification Rates ◽  
Rapid Action ◽  
Hierarchic Level ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Size Estimates

A classic question in evolutionary biology concerns the tempo and mode of lineage evolution. Considered variously in relation to resource utilization, intrinsic constraints or hierarchic level, the question of how evolutionary change occurs in general has continued to draw the attention of the field for over a century and a half. Here we use the largest species-level phylogeny of Coenozoic fossil mammals (1031 species) ever assembled and their body size estimates, to show that body size and taxonomic diversification rates declined from the origin of placentals towards the present, and very probably correlate to each other. These findings suggest that morphological and taxic diversifications of mammals occurred hierarchically, with major shifts in body size coinciding with the birth of large clades, followed by taxonomic diversification within these newly formed clades. As the clades expanded, rates of taxonomic diversification proceeded independently of phenotypic evolution. Such a dynamic is consistent with the idea, central to the Modern Synthesis, that mammals radiated adaptively, with the filling of adaptive zones following the radiation.

How general are genera? The genus in systematic zoology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Cambefort
Keyword(s):  
Charles Darwin ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free System ◽  
Genus Level ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Georges Cuvier ◽  
Carl Linnaeus ◽  
Systematic Zoology ◽  
Higher Categories ◽  
The One

This article examines how the genus category was perceived and conceived in zoology (with occasional references to botany), in reference to species on the one hand and to higher categories on the other hand. In systematic zoology and botany, animals and plants are classified and named according to their species, genera, and higher categories (family, order, etc.). Linguistic relationships between the words ‘genus’ and ‘general, generality’ might have played a role in some intuitive meaning of the genus. This article traces the evolution of the concept of genus as used in systematic zoology from antiquity to the present time, focusing on the contributions of Plato, Aristotle, Carl Linnaeus, Georges-Louis Leclerc de Buffon, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Georges Cuvier, and Charles Darwin. It also considers the introduction of a new, rank-free system called the PhyloCode to replace Linnaean ranking—and especially the genus level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document