The PhyloCode, types, ranks and monophyly: A response to Pickett

23Citations
Citations of this article
136Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A report from the First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting recently published in Cladistics conveys several misconceptions about the PhyloCode and presents an erroneous interpretation of discussions that took place at that meeting. Contrary to Pickett's assertions, the PhyloCode is designed to name clades, not paraphyletic groups; the rejection of ranks has never been a fundamental principle of phylogenetic nomenclature; and specifiers under the PhyloCode differ in several ways from types under rank-based nomenclature. © The Willi Hennig Society 2005.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Laurin, M., De Queiroz, K., Cantino, P., Cellinese, N., & Olmstead, R. (2005, December). The PhyloCode, types, ranks and monophyly: A response to Pickett. Cladistics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2005.00090.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free