Misplaced Pages

#260739

49-470: Musteloidea is a superfamily of carnivoran mammals united by shared characteristics of the skull and teeth. Musteloids are the sister group of pinnipeds , the group which includes seals. Musteloidea comprises the following families: In North America , ursids (bears) and musteloids first appeared in the Chadronian of the late Eocene , and in early- Oligocene Europe , immediately following

98-499: A BioCode that would regulate all taxon names, but this attempt has so far failed because of firmly entrenched traditions in each community. Consider a particular species, the red fox , Vulpes vulpes : in the context of the Zoological Code , the specific epithet vulpes (small v ) identifies a particular species in the genus Vulpes (capital V ) which comprises all the "true" foxes. Their close relatives are all in

147-420: A "hybrid formula" that specifies the parentage, or may be given a name. For hybrids receiving a hybrid name , the same ranks apply, prefixed with notho (Greek: 'bastard'), with nothogenus as the highest permitted rank. If a different term for the rank was used in an old publication, but the intention is clear, botanical nomenclature specifies certain substitutions: Classifications of five species follow:

196-527: A clean sweep in 1980 (Skerman et al., "Approved Lists of Bacterial Names"), although maintaining the original authors and dates of publication. Exceptions in botany: Exceptions in zoology: There are also differences in the way codes work. For example, the ICN (the code for algae, fungi and plants) forbids tautonyms , while the ICZN , (the animal code) allows them. These codes differ in terminology, and there

245-567: A fast evolutionary radiation that occurred long ago, such as the main taxa of placental mammals . In his landmark publications, such as the Systema Naturae , Carl Linnaeus used a ranking scale limited to kingdom, class, order, genus, species, and one rank below species. Today, the nomenclature is regulated by the nomenclature codes . There are seven main taxonomic ranks: kingdom, phylum or division, class, order, family, genus, and species. In addition, domain (proposed by Carl Woese )

294-638: A lower level may be denoted by adding the prefix " infra ", meaning lower , to the rank. For example, infra order (below suborder) or infra family (below subfamily). Botanical ranks categorize organisms based (often) on their relationships ( monophyly is not required by that clade, which does not even mention this word, nor that of " clade "). They start with Kingdom, then move to Division (or Phylum), Class, Order, Family, Genus, and Species. Taxa at each rank generally possess shared characteristics and evolutionary history. Understanding these ranks aids in taxonomy and studying biodiversity. There are definitions of

343-399: A new rank at will, at any time, if they feel this is necessary. In doing so, there are some restrictions, which will vary with the nomenclature code that applies. The following is an artificial synthesis, solely for purposes of demonstration of absolute rank (but see notes), from most general to most specific: Ranks are assigned based on subjective dissimilarity, and do not fully reflect

392-459: A particular organism, it is usually not necessary to specify names at ranks other than these first two, within a set of taxa covered by a given rank-based code. However, this is not true globally because most rank-based codes are independent from each other, so there are many inter-code homonyms (the same name used for different organisms, often for an animal and for a taxon covered by the botanical code). For this reason, attempts were made at creating

441-576: A taxon in a category above the species level). It should be a natural group (that is, non-artificial, non- polyphyletic ), as judged by a biologist, using all the information available to them. Equally ranked higher taxa in different phyla are not necessarily equivalent in terms of time of origin, phenotypic distinctiveness or number of lower-ranking included taxa (e.g., it is incorrect to assume that families of insects are in some way evolutionarily comparable to families of mollusks). Of all criteria that have been advocated to rank taxa, age of origin has been

490-409: Is a formal system of naming species of living things by giving each a name composed of two parts, both of which use Latin grammatical forms , although they can be based on words from other languages. Such a name is called a binomial name (which may be shortened to just "binomial"), a binomen , binominal name, or a scientific name ; more informally it is also historically called a Latin name . In

539-565: Is a long-term project to "harmonize" this. For instance, the ICN uses "valid" in "valid publication of a name" (=the act of publishing a formal name), with "establishing a name" as the ICZN equivalent. The ICZN uses "valid" in "valid name" (="correct name"), with "correct name" as the ICN equivalent. Harmonization is making very limited progress. There are differences in respect of what kinds of types are used. The bacteriological code prefers living type cultures, but allows other kinds. There has been ongoing debate regarding which kind of type

SECTION 10

#1732801557261

588-564: Is also called a binomial , that is, a two-term name. For example, the zoological name for the human species is Homo sapiens . This is usually italicized in print or underlined when italics are not available. In this case, Homo is the generic name and it is capitalized; sapiens indicates the species and it is not capitalized. While not always used, some species include a subspecific epithet. For instance, modern humans are Homo sapiens sapiens , or H. sapiens sapiens . In zoological nomenclature, higher taxon names are normally not italicized, but

637-506: Is applied primarily to the ranks of superfamily and below. There are some rules for names above the rank of superfamily, but the principle of priority does not apply to them, and the principle of typification is optional. These names may be either automatically typified names or be descriptive names . In some circumstances, a taxon has two possible names (e.g., Chrysophyceae Pascher, 1914, nom. descrip. ; Hibberd, 1976, nom. typificatum ). Descriptive names are problematic, once that, if

686-516: Is more useful in a case like cyanobacteria . A more radical approach was made in 1997 when the IUBS / IUMS International Committee on Bionomenclature (ICB) presented the long debated Draft BioCode , proposed to replace all existing Codes with an harmonization of them. The originally planned implementation date for the BioCode draft was January 1, 2000, but agreement to replace the existing Codes

735-467: Is not a requirement of the zoological and botanical codes. A classification in which all taxa have formal ranks cannot adequately reflect knowledge about phylogeny. Since taxon names are dependent on ranks in rank-based (Linnaean) nomenclature, taxa without ranks cannot be given names. Alternative approaches, such as phylogenetic nomenclature , as implemented under the PhyloCode and supported by

784-435: Is now widely used as a fundamental rank, although it is not mentioned in any of the nomenclature codes, and is a synonym for dominion ( Latin : dominium ), introduced by Moore in 1974. A taxon is usually assigned a rank when it is given its formal name. The basic ranks are species and genus. When an organism is given a species name it is assigned to a genus, and the genus name is part of the species name. The species name

833-406: Is part of nomenclature rather than taxonomy proper, according to some definitions of these terms) is the relative or absolute level of a group of organisms (a taxon ) in a hierarchy that reflects evolutionary relationships. Thus, the most inclusive clades (such as Eukarya and Opisthokonta ) have the highest ranks, whereas the least inclusive ones (such as Homo sapiens or Bufo bufo ) have

882-411: Is usually associated with a certain body plan , which is also, however, an arbitrary criterion. Enigmatic taxa are taxonomic groups whose broader relationships are unknown or undefined. (See Incertae sedis .) There are several acronyms intended to help memorise the taxonomic hierarchy, such as "King Phillip came over for great spaghetti". (See taxonomy mnemonic .) BioCode As

931-789: The Botanical Code , the Prokaryotic Code , the Code for Viruses , the draft BioCode and the PhyloCode all recommend italicizing all taxon names (of all ranks). There are rules applying to the following taxonomic ranks in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature : superfamily, family, subfamily, tribe, subtribe, genus, subgenus, species, subspecies. The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature divides names into "family-group names", "genus-group names" and "species-group names". The Code explicitly mentions

980-805: The Grande Coupure extinction event. The following cladogram is based on molecular phylogeny of six genes in Flynn (2005), with the musteloids updated following the multigene analysis of Law et al. (2018). Canidae (dogs and other canines) [REDACTED] Ursidae (bears) [REDACTED] Pinnipedia (seals) [REDACTED] Mephitidae (skunks) [REDACTED] Ailuridae (red pandas) [REDACTED] Procyonidae (raccoons, coatis, kinkajous) [REDACTED] Mustelidae (weasels, otters, badgers) [REDACTED] Superfamily (taxonomy) In biology , taxonomic rank (which some authors prefer to call nomenclatural rank because ranking

1029-483: The International Society for Phylogenetic Nomenclature , or using circumscriptional names , avoid this problem. The theoretical difficulty with superimposing taxonomic ranks over evolutionary trees is manifested as the boundary paradox which may be illustrated by Darwinian evolutionary models. There are no rules for how many species should make a genus, a family, or any other higher taxon (that is,

SECTION 20

#1732801557261

1078-727: The Prokaryotic Code , and the Code for Viruses ) require them. However, absolute ranks are not required in all nomenclatural systems for taxonomists; for instance, the PhyloCode , the code of phylogenetic nomenclature , does not require absolute ranks. Taxa are hierarchical groups of organisms, and their ranks describes their position in this hierarchy. High-ranking taxa (e.g. those considered to be domains or kingdoms, for instance) include more sub-taxa than low-ranking taxa (e.g. those considered genera, species or subspecies). The rank of these taxa reflects inheritance of traits or molecular features from common ancestors. The name of any species and genus are basic ; which means that to identify

1127-427: The fruit fly familiar in genetics laboratories ( Drosophila melanogaster ), humans ( Homo sapiens ), the peas used by Gregor Mendel in his discovery of genetics ( Pisum sativum ), the "fly agaric" mushroom Amanita muscaria , and the bacterium Escherichia coli . The eight major ranks are given in bold; a selection of minor ranks are given as well. Taxa above the genus level are often given names based on

1176-645: The gut fungi . Other problematic groups are the Cyanobacteria (ICNP/ICN) and Microsporidia (ICZN/ICN). The zoological code does not regulate names of taxa lower than subspecies or higher than superfamily. There are many attempts to introduce some order on the nomenclature of these taxa, including the PhyloCode , the Duplostensional Nomenclatural System, and circumscriptional nomenclature . The botanical code

1225-418: The type genus , with a standard termination. The terminations used in forming these names depend on the kingdom (and sometimes the phylum and class) as set out in the table below. Pronunciations given are the most Anglicized . More Latinate pronunciations are also common, particularly / ɑː / rather than / eɪ / for stressed a . There is an indeterminate number of ranks, as a taxonomist may invent

1274-633: The American Ornithologists' Union published in 1886 states "No one appears to have suspected, in 1842 [when the Strickland code was drafted], that the Linnaean system was not the permanent heritage of science, or that in a few years a theory of evolution was to sap its very foundations, by radically changing men's conceptions of those things to which names were to be furnished." Such ranks are used simply because they are required by

1323-487: The ICZN, the system is also called binominal nomenclature , "binomi'N'al" with an "N" before the "al", which is not a typographic error, meaning "two-name naming system". The first part of the name – the generic name – identifies the genus to which the species belongs, whereas the second part – the specific name or specific epithet – distinguishes the species within the genus. For example, modern humans belong to

1372-523: The Linnean system in phylogenetic classification. In fact, early proponents of rank-based nomenclature, such as Alphonse de Candolle and the authors of the 1886 version of the American Ornithologists' Union code of nomenclature already envisioned that in the future, rank-based nomenclature would have to be abandoned. Another Code that was developed since 1998 is the PhyloCode , which now regulates names defined under phylogenetic nomenclature instead of

1421-432: The family Canidae , which includes dogs, wolves, jackals, and all foxes; the next higher major taxon, Carnivora (considered an order), includes caniforms (bears, seals, weasels, skunks, raccoons and all those mentioned above), and feliforms (cats, civets, hyenas, mongooses). Carnivorans are one group of the hairy, warm-blooded, nursing members of the class Mammalia , which are classified among animals with notochords in

1470-1085: The first names established under that code. Some protists , sometimes called ambiregnal protists , have been considered to be both protozoa and algae , or protozoa and fungi , and names for these have been published under either or both of the ICZN and the ICN . The resulting double language throughout protist classification schemes resulted in confusion. Groups claimed by both protozoologists and phycologists include euglenids , dinoflagellates , cryptomonads , haptophytes , glaucophytes , many heterokonts (e.g., chrysophytes , raphidophytes , silicoflagellates , some xanthophytes , proteromonads ), some monadoid green algae ( volvocaleans and prasinophytes ), choanoflagellates , bicosoecids , ebriids and chlorarachniophytes . Slime molds , plasmodial forms and other " fungus-like " organisms claimed by both protozoologists and mycologists include mycetozoans , plasmodiophorids , acrasids , and labyrinthulomycetess . Fungi claimed by both protozoologists and mycologists include chytrids , blastoclads , and

1519-599: The following ranks for these categories: The rules in the Code apply to the ranks of superfamily to subspecies, and only to some extent to those above the rank of superfamily. Among "genus-group names" and "species-group names" no further ranks are officially allowed, which creates problems when naming taxa in these groups in speciose clades, such as Rana . Zoologists sometimes use additional terms such as species group , species subgroup , species complex and superspecies for convenience as extra, but unofficial, ranks between

Musteloidea - Misplaced Pages Continue

1568-464: The following taxonomic categories in the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants : cultivar group , cultivar , grex . The rules in the ICN apply primarily to the ranks of family and below, and only to some extent to those above the rank of family. (See also descriptive botanical name .) Taxa at the rank of genus and above have a botanical name in one part (unitary name); those at

1617-587: The genus Homo and within this genus to the species Homo sapiens . Tyrannosaurus rex is likely the most widely known binomial. The formal introduction of this system of naming species is credited to Carl Linnaeus , effectively beginning with his work Species Plantarum in 1753. But as early as 1622, Gaspard Bauhin introduced in his book Pinax theatri botanici (English, Illustrated exposition of plants ) containing many names of genera that were later adopted by Linnaeus. The introduction of two-part names (binominal nomenclature) for species by Linnaeus

1666-480: The gradational nature of variation within nature. These problems were already identified by Willi Hennig , who advocated dropping them in 1969, and this position gathered support from Graham C. D. Griffiths only a few years later. In fact, these ranks were proposed in a fixist context and the advent of evolution sapped the foundations of this system, as was recognised long ago; the introduction of The Code of Nomenclature and Check-list of North American Birds Adopted by

1715-434: The hierarchy of taxa (hence, their ranks) does not necessarily reflect the hierarchy of clades . While older approaches to taxonomic classification were phenomenological, forming groups on the basis of similarities in appearance, organic structure and behavior, two important new methods developed in the second half of the 20th century changed drastically taxonomic practice. One is the advent of cladistics , which stemmed from

1764-422: The lowest ranks. Ranks can be either relative and be denoted by an indented taxonomy in which the level of indentation reflects the rank, or absolute, in which various terms, such as species , genus , family , order , class , phylum , kingdom , and domain designate rank. This page emphasizes absolute ranks and the rank-based codes (the Zoological Code , the Botanical Code , the Code for Cultivated Plants ,

1813-405: The most basic (or important) is the species, but this opinion is not universally shared. Thus, species are not necessarily more sharply defined than taxa at any other rank, and in fact, given the phenotypic gaps created by extinction, in practice, the reverse is often the case. Ideally, a taxon is intended to represent a clade , that is, the phylogeny of the organisms under discussion, but this

1862-409: The most frequently advocated. Willi Hennig proposed it in 1966, but he concluded in 1969 that this system was unworkable and suggested dropping absolute ranks. However, the idea of ranking taxa using the age of origin (either as the sole criterion, or as one of the main ones) persists under the name of time banding, and is still advocated by several authors. For animals, at least the phylum rank

1911-418: The naming of: The starting point, that is the time from which these codes are in effect (usually retroactively), varies from group to group, and sometimes from rank to rank. In botany and mycology , the starting point is often 1 May 1753 ( Linnaeus , Species plantarum ). In zoology , it is 1 January 1758 (Linnaeus, Systema Naturae , 10th Edition ). On the other hand, bacteriology started anew, making

1960-479: The phylum Chordata , and with them among all animals in the kingdom Animalia . Finally, at the highest rank all of these are grouped together with all other organisms possessing cell nuclei in the domain Eukarya . The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature defines rank as: "The level, for nomenclatural purposes, of a taxon in a taxonomic hierarchy (e.g. all families are for nomenclatural purposes at

2009-455: The rank of species and above (but below genus) have a botanical name in two parts ( binary name ); all taxa below the rank of species have a botanical name in three parts (an infraspecific name ). To indicate the rank of the infraspecific name, a "connecting term" is needed. Thus Poa secunda subsp. juncifolia , where "subsp". is an abbreviation for "subspecies", is the name of a subspecies of Poa secunda . Hybrids can be specified either by

Musteloidea - Misplaced Pages Continue

2058-653: The rank-based codes; because of this, some systematists prefer to call them nomenclatural ranks . In most cases, higher taxonomic groupings arise further back in time, simply because the most inclusive taxa necessarily appeared first. Furthermore, the diversity in some major taxa (such as vertebrates and angiosperms ) is better known that that of others (such as fungi , arthropods and nematodes ) not because they are more diverse than other taxa, but because they are more easily sampled and studied than other taxa, or because they attract more interest and funding for research. Of these many ranks, many systematists consider that

2107-468: The same rank, which lies between superfamily and subfamily)." Note that the discussions on this page generally assume that taxa are clades ( monophyletic groups of organisms), but this is required neither by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature nor by the Botanical Code , and some experts on biological nomenclature do not think that this should be required, and in that case,

2156-519: The study of biology became increasingly specialized, specific codes were adopted for different types of organism. To an end-user who only deals with names of species, with some awareness that species are assignable to genera , families , and other taxa of higher ranks, it may not be noticeable that there is more than one code, but beyond this basic level these are rather different in the way they work. In taxonomy , binomial nomenclature ("two-term naming system"), also called binary nomenclature ,

2205-485: The subgenus and species levels in taxa with many species, e.g. the genus Drosophila . (Note the potentially confusing use of "species group" as both a category of ranks as well as an unofficial rank itself. For this reason, Alain Dubois has been using the alternative expressions "nominal-series", "family-series", "genus-series" and "species-series" (among others) at least since 2000. ) At higher ranks (family and above)

2254-407: The traditional Linnaean nomenclature . This new approach requires using phylogenetic definitions that refer to "specifiers", analogous to "type" under rank-based nomenclature. Such definitions delimit taxa under a given phylogeny, and this kind of nomenclature does not require use of absolute ranks. The Code took effect in 2020, with the publication of Phylonyms , a monograph that includes a list of

2303-727: The works of the German entomologist Willi Hennig . Cladistics is a method of classification of life forms according to the proportion of characteristics that they have in common (called synapomorphies ). It is assumed that the higher the proportion of characteristics that two organisms share, the more recently they both came from a common ancestor. The second one is molecular systematics, based on genetic analysis , which can provide much additional data that prove especially useful when few phenotypic characters can resolve relationships, as, for instance, in many viruses , bacteria and archaea , or to resolve relationships between taxa that arose in

2352-524: Was a welcome simplification because as our knowledge of biodiversity expanded, so did the length of the names, many of which had become unwieldy. With all naturalists worldwide adopting binominal nomenclature, there arose several schools of thought about the details. It became ever more apparent that a detailed body of rules was necessary to govern scientific names . From the mid-19th century onwards, there were several initiatives to arrive at worldwide-accepted sets of rules. Presently nomenclature codes govern

2401-462: Was not reached. In 2011, a revised BioCode was proposed that, instead of replacing the existing Codes , would provide a unified context for them, referring to them when necessary. Changes in the existing codes are slowly being made in the proposed directions. However, participants of the last serious discussion of the draft BioCode concluded that it would probably not be implemented in their lifetimes. Many authors encountered problems in using

#260739