[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: The PhyloCode will not address the naming of species (Was The Papers That Ate Cincinnati)



On 5/8/07, Anthony Docimo <keenir@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Family Hylobatidae
>  Genus Hylobates
>Family Pongidae
>  Genus Gorilla
>  Genus Pongo
>  Genus Pan
>Family Hominidae
>  Genus Homo
>
>Family Hylobatidae
>  Genus Bunopithecus
>  Genus Hylobates
>  Genus Nomascus
>  Genus Symphalangus
>Family Hominidae
>Subfamily Ponginae
>  Genus Pongo
>Subfamily Homininae
>  Genus Gorilla
>  Genus Homo
>  Genus Pan

as far as I can tell, these are two different cladograms *as well as* two
different classifications.

They aren't, though. They are both based on the topology ((_Bunopithecus_, _Hylobates_, _Nomascus_, _Symphalangus_), (_Pongo_, (_Gorilla_, (_Homo_, _Pan_)))). The first one opts to recognize mankind's special place among the great apes by creating a paraphyletic category (Family Pongidae). The second one better reflects the cladogram (although it should be noted that once extinct taxa are added, something will have to give: the last common ancestor of gibbons and great apes would have to be placed in a paraphyletic Hylobatidae, a paraphyletic Hominidae, or some new, doubly paraphyletic family).

Also worth noting that the decision of how inclusive _Hylobates_
should be is subjective. The ICZN's only mandate on the matter is that
it has to include _H. lar_. Whether _Nomascus_, _Symphalangus_, and
_Bunopithecus_ are considered separate genera or subgenera of
_Hylobates_ (or, in some cases, just _Bunopithecus_ and _Nomascus_ as
subgenera of a potentially paraphyletic _Hylobates_) is completely up
to the whim of the author.

--
Mike Keesey