These are my last posts on these for a while - I actually have things to
do. I am responding to several people here.
I really do think phylogenetic taxonomy is the way taxonomy is going. It
seems to be the method of choice among nearly all systematists I work with,
and there is a growing understanding that paraphyletic assemblages should
not be recognized as taxa.
>If I'm following, creating a named group would exclude species which should
>evolutionarily be included based on some further rules for inclusion.
??????? not sure I understand, but I'd say no - a monophyletic group
includes an ancestor and ALL of its descendents (irrespective of Ashlock's
terminology, which very few people use). ...