Re: Rank taxonomy (was Re: Cladism (akin to masochism))

[jpoling@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Poling)]

>>   Are the terms Class, Order, Infraorder, etc. used in the clade world?
>
>Some people have tried to reconcile Linnean ranks and cladistic groupings,
>but they have run into problems (if Aves is a Class, than what about
>Theropoda? Saurischia? Dinosauria? etc.).  There has been a move to drop
>the Class, Order, Infraorder, etc. ranks, to make things simpler and to
>reduce the number of names.  (Although cladism has been blamed for an
>increase in the number of names, gradism created plenty of redundant names
>[e.g., Family Archaeoptergyidae, Order Archaeopterygiformes, Subclass
>Saururae, all of which contain only the species Archaeopteryx
>lithographica] in order to satisfy all the 'appropriate' ranks).

   Cool.  Now the question is, are the names just put into a list?  I.e. you
just have a column of names going from the species all the way back to that
first blue-green algae?

    Deinonychus
    Deinonychosauria
    Maniraptora
    Coelurosauria
    Tetanurae
    Theropoda
    etc.

    is going to be damn difficult to represent in a relational database......

** "A warp core breach is imminent?     ** "Those who trade a little freedom **
** This calls for the handyman's secret ** for a little security will soon   **
** weapon, duct tape." --- Red Green,   ** find that they have none of       **
** Chief Engineer, U.S.S. Voyager       ** either." --- Jeff Poling          **