NOMENCLATURE AND CLASSIFICATION OF ORGANISMS
XXI
P. Grasse, ed., "Traite de Zoologie," 17 volumes. Masson, Paris, 1948.
A. S. Romer, "The Vertebrate Body," 2nd ed. Saunders, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, 1955.
K. V. Thimann, "The Life of Bacteria." Macmillan, New York, 1955.
Summary
1. The Charts are hypothetical schemes showing the relationships between major taxa of extant organisms, and represent one possible
picture based largely on evidence from paleontology and the comparative morphology of living forms. The composite chart (I) has
been derived mainly from Hyman (5) and Smith (6), and represents a generalized opinion held by many biologists. No two biologists, however, would ever agree on all details of such a chart.
2. The artificial classification systems such as those summarized in the
"Handbook of Biological Data" (pp. 527-533) (7) are more inclusive (and therefore, more useful for identification purposes), but
they fail to show our present day concepts concerning phylogeny.
3. The phylogenetic chart, then, is presented as a guide to present day
concepts of phylogeny, and should serve only as a useful working
hypothesis.
4. Aid in the placement of organisms in either the artificial (7) or the
above phylogenetic scheme, and the explanation of synonymous
terms can be found in the references listed at the end.
5. Note that some forms within the microorganism complex are classified as both plants and animals: i.e., Euglena, Volvox, etc. For convenience sake, the Flagellata (Mastigophora) of the protozoans can
best be placed in the Chlorophyta or Euglenophyta [see Smith (6)].
6. Note that little emphasis should be placed on the relative level of
any taxonomic group above the species or perhaps the genus level.
Only the species can be defined in a nonarbitrary fashion (3, 4).
Other taxa are still arbitrarily designated. In other words, families,
classes, orders etc. in different evolutionary lines are not comparable
to each other in terms of evolutionary advancement, size, etc. (3).
The largest group is generally called a phylum in the animal kingdom and a division in the plant kingdom.
References
1. G. H. M. Lawrence, "Taxonomy of Vascular Plants." Macmillan, New York,
1951.
XXI
P. Grasse, ed., "Traite de Zoologie," 17 volumes. Masson, Paris, 1948.
A. S. Romer, "The Vertebrate Body," 2nd ed. Saunders, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, 1955.
K. V. Thimann, "The Life of Bacteria." Macmillan, New York, 1955.
Summary
1. The Charts are hypothetical schemes showing the relationships between major taxa of extant organisms, and represent one possible
picture based largely on evidence from paleontology and the comparative morphology of living forms. The composite chart (I) has
been derived mainly from Hyman (5) and Smith (6), and represents a generalized opinion held by many biologists. No two biologists, however, would ever agree on all details of such a chart.
2. The artificial classification systems such as those summarized in the
"Handbook of Biological Data" (pp. 527-533) (7) are more inclusive (and therefore, more useful for identification purposes), but
they fail to show our present day concepts concerning phylogeny.
3. The phylogenetic chart, then, is presented as a guide to present day
concepts of phylogeny, and should serve only as a useful working
hypothesis.
4. Aid in the placement of organisms in either the artificial (7) or the
above phylogenetic scheme, and the explanation of synonymous
terms can be found in the references listed at the end.
5. Note that some forms within the microorganism complex are classified as both plants and animals: i.e., Euglena, Volvox, etc. For convenience sake, the Flagellata (Mastigophora) of the protozoans can
best be placed in the Chlorophyta or Euglenophyta [see Smith (6)].
6. Note that little emphasis should be placed on the relative level of
any taxonomic group above the species or perhaps the genus level.
Only the species can be defined in a nonarbitrary fashion (3, 4).
Other taxa are still arbitrarily designated. In other words, families,
classes, orders etc. in different evolutionary lines are not comparable
to each other in terms of evolutionary advancement, size, etc. (3).
The largest group is generally called a phylum in the animal kingdom and a division in the plant kingdom.
References
1. G. H. M. Lawrence, "Taxonomy of Vascular Plants." Macmillan, New York,
1951.