“A character does not make a genus, but the genus makes the character”: three-taxon statement analysis and intuitive taxonomy

  • Evgeny Mavrodiev University of Florida, Florida Museum of Natural History, Museum Road and Newell Drive, Dickinson Hall, 301, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA.
  • Olga Yurtseva M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Department of Higher Plants, 1–12, Leninskie Gory, 119234, Moscow,Russia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2017.377
Keywords: three-taxon statement analysis, intuitive taxonomy, synapomorphy, diagnostic traits

Abstract

Three-taxon statement analysis (3TA) is a method that may help to formalize the taxonomical intuition of the synapomorphy of the clade as a combination of its diagnostic traits, even if each trait, if taken separately, may be found in one or many other taxa of the same relationship. Using example based on the real morphological data, we are showing that 3TA can recognize clade in case of the complete lack of it synapomorphies, as optimized under the criterion of standard parsimony.

References

Crespo M.B., Martinez-Azorin M. & Mavrodiev E.V. 2015. Can a rainbow consist of a single colour? A new comprehensive generic arrangement of the ‘Iris sensu latissimo’ clade (Iridaceae), congruent with morphology and molecular data. Phytotaxa 232: 1–78. https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.232.1.1

Husserl E. 1913. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy – First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Boston. [Reprinted in 1982.]

Kuzin B.S. 1992. The decadence of Systematics, I. Nature (Priroda- published by Russian Academy of Science): 80–88. [In Russian; Publication was prepared by Dr. I. Ya. Pavlinov (Zoological Museum of M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University)]

Maddison W.P. & Maddison D.R. 2011. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 3.31.

Mavrodiev E.V. 2016. Dealing with propositions, not with the characters: the ability of three-taxon statement analysis to recognise groups based solely on ‘reversals’, under the maximum-likelihood criteria. Australian Systematic Botany 29: 119-125. https://doi.org/10.1071/SB16006

Mavrodiev E.V. & Madorsky A. 2012. TAXODIUM Version 1.0: a simple way to generate uniform and fractionally weighted three-item matrices from various kinds of biological data. PLoS One 7 (11): e48813. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048813

Mavrodiev E.V., Martinez-Azorin M., Dranishnikov P. & Crespo M.B. 2014. At least 23 genera instead of one: the case of Iris L. s.l. (Iridaceae). PLoS One 9 (8): e106459. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106459

Nelson G. 1996. “Nullius in verba”. Self-published, New York.

Nelson G. 2004. Cladistics: its arrested development. In: Williams D.M. & Forey P.L. (eds) Milestones in Systematics: 127-148. CRC Press, Boca Raton, London, New York and Washington, DC

Nelson G. 2011. Resemblance as evidence of ancestry. Zootaxa 2946: 147–141.

Nelson G. & Platnick N.I. 1991. Three-taxon statements - a more precise use of parsimony? Cladistics 7: 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.1991.tb00044.x

Richter S. 2016. Homology and synapomorphy-symplesiomorphy-neither synonymous nor equivalent but different perspectives on the same phenomenon. Cladistics 7: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12180

Schuetz A. 1959. Type and eidos in Husserl’s late philosophy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 20: 147–165. https://doi.org/10.2307/2104353

Scotland R.W & Steel M. 2015. Circumstances in which parsimony but not compatibility will be provably misleading. Systematic Biology 64: 492–504. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syv008

Seamon D. 1998. Goethe, nature, and phenomenology: an introduction. In: Seamon D. & Zajonc A. (eds) Goethe’s Way of Science - A Phenomenology of Nature: 1–15. State University of New York Press, New York.

Swofford D. L. 2002. PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and other methods), v. 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Tavakkoli S., Osaloo S.K., Mozaffarian V. & Maassoumi A.A. 2015. Molecular phylogeny of Atraphaxis and the woody Polygonum species (Polygonaceae): taxonomic implications based on molecular and morphological evidence. Plant Systematics and Evolution 301: 1157–1170.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-014-1140-7

Uehlein F.A. 1992. Eidos and eidetic variation in Husserl’s Phenomenology. In: Spitzer M. et al. (eds) Phenomenology, Language & Schizophrenia: 88–102. Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-9329-0_6

Williams D.M. & Ebach MC. 2005. Drowning by numbers: rereading Nelson’s “Nullius in Verba”. Botanical Review 71: 415–447. https://doi.org/10.1663/0006-8101(2005)071[0415:DBNRNN]2.0.CO;2

Williams D.M. & Ebach M.C. 2008. Foundations of systematics and biogeography. Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2010.00335.x

Williams D.M. & Ebach M.C. 2016. What is intuitive taxonomic practise? Systematic Biology syw094. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syw094

Williams D.M. & Siebert D. J. 2000. Characters, homology and three-item analysis. In: Scotland R.W. & Pennington R.T. (eds) Homology and Systematics: Coding Characters for Phylogenetic Analysis: 183-208. Chapman & Hall, London, New York.

Yurtseva O.V. & Mavrodiev E.V. 2017. Genus Persepolium nom. provis. (Polygonaceae, Polygoneae): evidence from the results of the standard maximum parsimony analysis and the three-taxon statement analysis of the comprehensive morphological dataset. In: Sokoloff D. et al. (eds) Conference on Taxonomy and Evolutionary Plant Morphology Dedicated to the 85th Anniversary of V.N.Tikhomirov, January 31–February 3, 2017. M.V. Lomonossov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.

Yurtseva O.V., Kuznetsova O.I., Mavrodieva M.E. & Mavrodiev E.V. 2016. What is Atraphaxis L. (Polygonaceae, Polygoneae): cryptic taxa and resolved taxonomic complexity instead of the formal lumping and the lack of morphological synapomorphies. PeerJ 4. e1977 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1977

Yurtseva O.V., Severova E.E. & Mavrodiev E.V. 2017. Persepolium (Polygoneae): A new genus in Polygonaceae based on conventional Maximum Parsimony and Three-Taxon Statement analyses of a comprehensive morphological dataset. Phytotaxa 314 (2): 151–194. https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.314.2.1

Published
2017-12-11
How to Cite
Mavrodiev, E., & Yurtseva, O. (2017). “A character does not make a genus, but the genus makes the character”: three-taxon statement analysis and intuitive taxonomy. European Journal of Taxonomy, (377). https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2017.377
Issue
No. 377 (2017): “A character does not make a genus, but the genus makes the character”: three-taxon statement analysis and intuitive taxonomy
Section
Opinion Paper
Copyright (c) 2017 Evgeny Mavrodiev, Olga Yurtseva

Creative Commons Copyright Notices

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are NOT ALLOWED TO post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to taxonomic issues.