I was quite surprised to hear when many of our teachers and tutors gave feedback regarding the rules of taxonomic nomenclature (i.e. how to write the names of animal goups) – apparently, a significant few have difficulties with those norms. I recall having written a text going through the essential principles and the framework for how you write these formal names for my old website, which I shut down in favour of this blog. So, I thought I could post that text here as well, hoping it can clarify some confusion.
The taxonomic system for the hierarchical (ranked) classification of living organisms (and initially also of rocks, but that failed) is very simple. Organisms are assigned into different groups based on their characteristics, and these groups are hierarchical. The figure below shows the seven main types of groups. Kingdom is “higher” than phylum, while class is “lower”, and so on.
For some, but not all groups there are subdivisions of these group types, such as subclass (subdivision within a class), infraorder (subdivision within a suborder; i.e. infra- is “below” sub-), and grouping of groups – e.g. superorder (group of orders).
Since the system is hierarchical, organisms belonging to the same class also belong to the same phylum and kingdom. For instance, all animals belonging to the class Reptilia (reptiles, then) also belong to the phylum Chordata (animals with a notochord, or backbone) and the kingdom Animalia (animals).
Now, the order Primates (primates), although belonging to the class Mammalia instead of Reptilia, also belongs to the phylum Chordata and kingdom Animalia. This might complicate things, but it is simply due to that the two classes Reptilia and Mammalia both belong to the same phylum and (therefore) kingdom.
Notice that the name of the class is written with a capital first letter when you refer to the actual group. If you instead write “carnivorans” (belonging to the mammalian order Carnivora; not equal to “carnivore”, which refers to a feeding strategy – not a taxonomic group), you are really referring to the members of the group, and you do not use capital letters. This rule is useful for distinguishing between, for example, Primates and primates.
While on the subject of formal rules, the genus and species are special. First, both are always written in italics. Always. Second, the genus name is written with capital first letter, but the species never has a capital. Third, you may refer to the genus alone, e.g. Tyrannosaurus, but never ever write only the species name. Never. This is because there may be several different species with the same name, (for instance, they may be named after the same discoverer) but they never belong to the same genus (if they do, they are simply not allowed to have the same species name). In this way, we get an endless variety of specific names for an endless variety of species. Finally, you may shorten the genus name to only the first letter (capital) followed by a dot and the species name (if you do not include the species name, you may not shorten the genus name – it would be silly to write something like “T. had remarkably short arms”). For example, we take the genus Tyrannosaurus (species name is excluded, since I refer to the genus), which has one species: Tyrannosaurus rex – although some researchers argue that Tarbosaurus bataar really belongs to Tyrannosaurus; in that case, we would also have Tyrannosaurus bataar (the species name is the same, but is assigned to a different genus). Notice that I should not shorten the genus name here, since it may be unclear what I mean by T. bataar.
Names can be discarded or invalidated, usually by showing that two very similar species actually are the same, in which case the name given first is the one that remains valid. Rejected names are written within quotation marks, and never italicised. A classical example is that "Brontosaurus exelsus" and Apatosaurus ajax were shown to be the same species (and therefore also belonged to one and the same genus); Apatosaurus, being the first to have been described and named, was kept (both genus and species name).
Another notable convention is that families tend to end with -idae, superfamilies with -oidea and subfamilies with -inae (their members would then be -ids, -oids, and -ines, respectively). For example, we have the Hadrosauroidea (superfamily), Hadrosauridae (family) and Hadrosaurinae (subfamily).
Nowadays, the taxonomic system has been overshadowed by phylogenetic systematics, or cladistics. Cladistics is favoured because it systematically investigates evolutionary relationships, rather than just putting the organisms into different groups; cladistics tries to work out how they evolved, and how closely related different organisms are. Taxonomy, on the other hand, merely groups similar-looking organisms together in order to make some sense of the overwhelming chaos of life we have out there.
The groupings can differ quite a lot between taxonomy and cladistics, since cladistics has a predilection for groups that include all the descendants within an evolutionary line (i.e. monophyletic clades). Therefore, cladistics disregards the group Reptilia, as it does not include birds (class Aves) and mammals, both which have their origins in the reptilian evolutionary line. Instead, cladistics just group them all together as Amniota.
Tuesday, 20 November 2012
Tuesday, 6 November 2012
Bristol Aquarium
This Sunday, I
visited the Bristol Aquarium with a couple of friends from school. I had never
been to an aquarium before, so it was quite an experience!
It was
frustratingly difficult to take even decent photos through the glass tanks of
the fish that just wouldn’t stay still. Consequently, most pictures were
something like this:
Of course, I
will only show the least blurry photos in this post. For that reason, the post
will also be quite short – for better or for worse.
Among the
animals that were easy to photograph was the colossal lobster that seemed too large to be bothered to even move. You can
see the camera casing I placed outside the tank as a scale.
As my friend Joe
pointed out to me: note that the lobster has two different claw types, probably
adapted for different forms of food manipulation – the more robust one may be
for crunching hard shells, and the more slender claw could have a flesh-cutting
function.
Fluorescent invertebrates
made rather spectacular sights. Here is a medusa
(medusozoans) called Aurelia (looked
it up on Wikipedia).
And here are
some sea anemones (anthozoans):
Both are cnidarians, invertebrates with a radial
symmetry (which more or less means that they are symmetrical along various
different planes round the centre of the organism); most have tentacles with sting cells (called cnidocytes; hence the name) that are used to
capture prey. The group also includes corals,
within the subgroup Anthozoa – so they are put together with the sea anemones.
If memory serves, the characteristics that define the group has to do with
their reproductive cycle, but I have not looked much into it yet…
Corals there
were plenty of in the coral reef tank.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)