{"title":"\"Cladus\" and clade: a taxonomic odyssey.","authors":"P Tassy, M S Fischer","doi":"10.1007/s12064-020-00326-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The fate of \"clade,\" both as concept and word, is reconstructed here beginning with its first appearance in 1866 as \"Cladus,\" in Haeckel's Generelle Morphologie, continuing up to the present. Although central to phylogenetics, the concept of clade is paradoxical since it has been ambiguously understood or even misunderstood by its own promoters. Writings by Ernst Haeckel, Lucien Cuénot, and Julian Huxley, the three authors who discussed the notion of clade at length, are analyzed here in detail as a means of exploring this paradox. First conceived as a rank for a higher-level category, and later as a taxon, the clade is understood today in connection with Hennig's definition of a monophyletic group rather than through Huxley's successful but somehow ambiguous formalization. The inability of these authors to formulate a clear-cut exposition of the concept is considered here within three contexts: firstly, the burden of pre-Darwinian classifications based on similarity; secondly, the underestimation of Darwin's description of a genealogical group; and thirdly, the predominance of thinking in process (vs thinking in pattern), which was the basis of evolutionary systematics in the mid-twentieth century.</p>","PeriodicalId":54428,"journal":{"name":"Theory in Biosciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s12064-020-00326-2","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory in Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12064-020-00326-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The fate of "clade," both as concept and word, is reconstructed here beginning with its first appearance in 1866 as "Cladus," in Haeckel's Generelle Morphologie, continuing up to the present. Although central to phylogenetics, the concept of clade is paradoxical since it has been ambiguously understood or even misunderstood by its own promoters. Writings by Ernst Haeckel, Lucien Cuénot, and Julian Huxley, the three authors who discussed the notion of clade at length, are analyzed here in detail as a means of exploring this paradox. First conceived as a rank for a higher-level category, and later as a taxon, the clade is understood today in connection with Hennig's definition of a monophyletic group rather than through Huxley's successful but somehow ambiguous formalization. The inability of these authors to formulate a clear-cut exposition of the concept is considered here within three contexts: firstly, the burden of pre-Darwinian classifications based on similarity; secondly, the underestimation of Darwin's description of a genealogical group; and thirdly, the predominance of thinking in process (vs thinking in pattern), which was the basis of evolutionary systematics in the mid-twentieth century.
期刊介绍:
Theory in Biosciences focuses on new concepts in theoretical biology. It also includes analytical and modelling approaches as well as philosophical and historical issues. Central topics are:
Artificial Life;
Bioinformatics with a focus on novel methods, phenomena, and interpretations;
Bioinspired Modeling;
Complexity, Robustness, and Resilience;
Embodied Cognition;
Evolutionary Biology;
Evo-Devo;
Game Theoretic Modeling;
Genetics;
History of Biology;
Language Evolution;
Mathematical Biology;
Origin of Life;
Philosophy of Biology;
Population Biology;
Systems Biology;
Theoretical Ecology;
Theoretical Molecular Biology;
Theoretical Neuroscience & Cognition.