• Title of article

    Apomorphy-Based Definition Also Pinpoints a Node, and PhyloCode Names Prevent Effective Communication

  • Author/Authors

    Kojima، Jun-ichi نويسنده ,

  • Issue Information
    روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2003
  • Pages
    -43
  • From page
    44
  • To page
    0
  • Abstract
    Acceptable methods of defming taxon (or clade) names in the draft PhyloCode, or so-called phylogenetic nomenclature, are “node based,” “stem based,” and “apomorphy based.” All of them define a clade name by pinpointing a node; whereas nodebased and stem-based definitions require two or more taxon “specifiers” to define names, an apomorphy-based defmition requires two specifiers of different types; namely, a single-taxon specifier and a character specifier. The taxon specifier in an apomorphy-based definition is completely different from the “type” in the Linnaean system. Taxon (or clade) names in the PhyloCode are characterized in two entirely different manners: One is a name that does not change, either in its orthography or in the contents of the taxon referred to by it (or its meaning) over time; the other is a name that is just like a pure mark and thus has no meaning. Communication through such PhyloCode names is very ineffective or impossible.
  • Keywords
    Activity questionnaire , children , body composition , Doubly-labelled water , Energy expenditure , resting metabolic rate , Gender , Ethnic differences , Physical activity
  • Journal title
    THE BOTANICAL REVIEW
  • Serial Year
    2003
  • Journal title
    THE BOTANICAL REVIEW
  • Record number

    91315