[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Rank taxonomy (was Re: Cladism (akin to masochism))
>> Are the terms Class, Order, Infraorder, etc. used in the clade world?
>Some people have tried to reconcile Linnean ranks and cladistic groupings,
>but they have run into problems (if Aves is a Class, than what about
>Theropoda? Saurischia? Dinosauria? etc.). There has been a move to drop
>the Class, Order, Infraorder, etc. ranks, to make things simpler and to
>reduce the number of names. (Although cladism has been blamed for an
>increase in the number of names, gradism created plenty of redundant names
>[e.g., Family Archaeoptergyidae, Order Archaeopterygiformes, Subclass
>Saururae, all of which contain only the species Archaeopteryx
>lithographica] in order to satisfy all the 'appropriate' ranks).
Cool. Now the question is, are the names just put into a list? I.e. you
just have a column of names going from the species all the way back to that
first blue-green algae?
is going to be damn difficult to represent in a relational database......
** "A warp core breach is imminent? ** "Those who trade a little freedom **
** This calls for the handyman's secret ** for a little security will soon **
** weapon, duct tape." --- Red Green, ** find that they have none of **
** Chief Engineer, U.S.S. Voyager ** either." --- Jeff Poling **