School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, Berkshire, RG6 6BX, UK.
Syst Biol. 2021 Jan 1;70(1):197-201. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syaa067.
In a recent paper, Poe et al. assert that scientists should abandon clade-based approaches, particularly those using named taxonomic ranks. Poe et al. attempt to demonstrate that clade selection can have effects on the results of evolutionary analyses but unfortunately fall short of making any robust conclusions. Here, we demonstrate that the assertions made by Poe et al. have two important flaws: (i) an erroneous view of modern phylogenetic comparative methods; and (ii) a lack of statistical rigor in their analyses. We repeat Poe et al.'s analysis but using appropriate phylogenetic comparative approaches. We demonstrate that results remain consistent regardless of the clade definition. We go on to discuss the value of taxonomic groupings and how they can provide meaningful units of comparison in evolutionary study. Unlike the disheartening suggestion to abandon the use of clades, scientists can instead continue to use phylogenetic " corrections" that are already the standard for most comparative evolutionary analyses. [Comparative methods; evolution; phylogeny; taxonomy.].
在最近的一篇论文中，Poe 等人主张科学家应该放弃基于进化枝的方法，特别是那些使用命名分类等级的方法。Poe 等人试图证明进化枝的选择可能会对进化分析的结果产生影响，但不幸的是，他们未能得出任何可靠的结论。在这里，我们表明 Poe 等人的观点存在两个重要缺陷：（i）对现代系统发育比较方法的错误看法；（ii）他们的分析缺乏统计学严谨性。我们重复了 Poe 等人的分析，但使用了适当的系统发育比较方法。我们表明，无论进化枝的定义如何，结果都是一致的。我们接着讨论了分类群的价值，以及它们如何在进化研究中提供有意义的比较单位。与令人沮丧的放弃使用进化枝的建议不同，科学家们可以继续使用已经成为大多数比较进化分析标准的系统发育“修正”。[比较方法；进化；系统发育；分类学。]。
