The Linnaean system and its 250-year persistence
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] Philip,et al. Species names in phylogenetic nomenclature. , 1999, Systematic biology.
[2] J. Kojima. Apomorphy-based definition also pinpoints a node, and PhyloCode names prevent effective communication , 2008, The Botanical Review.
[3] K. Queiroz**,et al. Replacement of an Essentialistic Perspective on Taxonomic Definitions as Exemplified by the Definition of “Mammalia” , 1994 .
[4] R. Schuh. REVISION OF NEW WORLD PLAGIOGNATHUS FIEBER, WITH COMMENTS ON THE PALEARCTIC FAUNA AND THE DESCRIPTION OF A NEW GENUS (HETEROPTERA: MIRIDAE: PHYLINAE) , 2001 .
[5] D. Simberloff,et al. Molecules and Morphology in Evolution: Conflict or Compromise? , 1987 .
[6] E. S. Gaffney,et al. An Introduction to the Logic of Phylogeny Reconstruction , 1979 .
[7] K. Bremer. SUMMARY OF GREEN PLANT PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION , 1985, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.
[8] Q. Wheeler,et al. Forum – Taxonomic Stability is Ignorance , 1997 .
[9] Karl R. Popper,et al. The Open Society and Its Enemies , 1952 .
[10] R. Schuh. Plant Bugs of the World (Insecta: Heteroptera: Miridae): Systematic Catalog, Distributions, Host List, and Bibliography , 1995 .
[11] James F. Smith. Phylogenetics of seed plants : An analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL , 1993 .
[12] Michael S. Y. Lee. On recent arguments for phylogenetic nomenclature , 2001 .
[13] K. Nixon,et al. The PhyloCode is fatally flawed, and the “Linnaean” System can easily be fixed , 2008, The Botanical Review.
[14] David L. Hull,et al. THE EFFECT OF ESSENTIALISM ON TAXONOMY—TWO THOUSAND YEARS OF STASIS (I) * , 1965, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
[15] Randall T. Schuh,et al. Biological Systematics: Principles and Applications , 1999 .
[16] T. Stuessy. Taxon names are not defined , 2000 .
[17] E. Mayr. Toward a new philosophy of biology: observations of an evolutionist , 1988 .
[18] Marc Ereshefsky. The Poverty of the Linnaean Hierarchy: A Philosophical Study of Biological Taxonomy , 2000 .
[19] Werner Greuter,et al. International code of botanical nomenclature (Saint Louis Code) : adopted by the Sixteenth International Botanical Congress, St louis, Missouri, July-August 1999 , 2000 .
[20] Kevin de Queiroz,et al. Phylogeny as a Central Principle in Taxonomy: Phylogenetic Definitions of Taxon Names , 1990 .
[21] M. Ghiselin. “Definition,” “Character,” and Other Equivocal Terms , 1984 .
[22] J. Carpenter. Critique of pure folly , 2008, The Botanical review.
[23] K. Nixon,et al. On the Other “Phylogenetic Systematics” , 2000, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.
[24] K. Popper,et al. The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1960 .
[25] Q. Wheeler,et al. The illogical basis of phylogenetic nomenclature , 2008, The Botanical Review.
[26] H. Bryant,et al. A review of criticisms of phylogenetic nomenclature: is taxonomic freedom the fundamental issue? , 2002, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.
[27] K. Popper. The Poverty of Historicism , 1959 .
[28] K. Padian. Charles Darwin's views of classification in theory and practice. , 1999, Systematic biology.
[29] J L Edwards,et al. Interoperability of biodiversity databases: biodiversity information on every desktop. , 2000, Science.
[30] A. Mcintosh,et al. The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature , 1962, Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom.
[31] P. Sereno. Definitions in phylogenetic taxonomy: critique and rationale. , 1999, Systematic biology.
[32] K. Kron. Exploring Alternative Systems of Classification , 1996 .
[33] RONALD H. BRADY,et al. ON THE INDEPENDENCE OF SYSTEMATICS , 1985, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.
[34] K. Queiroz**,et al. The Linnaean Hierarchy and the Evolutionization of Taxonomy, with Emphasis on the Problem of Nomenclature , 1996 .
[35] G. Moore. A comparison of traditional and phylogenetic nomenclature , 1998 .