Stuessy Tod F, Hörandl Elvira
Department of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany, Biodiversity Center, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, Vienna, A-1030, Austria.
Department of Systematic Botany, Albrecht-von-Haller-Institute for Plant Sciences, Georg-August-University of Göttingen, Göttingen, 37073, Germany.
Cladistics. 2014 Jun;30(3):291-293. doi: 10.1111/cla.12038. Epub 2013 Jun 11.
The review of paraphyly in botanical systematics by Schmidt-Lebuhn brings together a number of useful perspectives for the reader. It fails to offer new ideas, however, and it does not recognize the fallacies of strict cladistic classification, namely accepting only holophyletic groups, and insisting that sister groups have the same rank. The reason for adherence to these rules is to maintain the convenience of cladistic classification. While convenience in biological classification by itself is not necessarily bad, it becomes unacceptable when its use overshadows achieving a higher level of evolutionary (and phylogenetic) information content. Evolutionary divergence and reticulation are both significant parts of the evolutionary process that cannot be ignored in biological classification and that are necessary for high predictive quality.
施密特 - 勒布恩对植物系统学中并系性的综述为读者汇集了许多有用的观点。然而，它未能提出新的观点，也没有认识到严格分支分类法的谬误，即只接受单系类群，并坚持姐妹类群具有相同的等级。坚持这些规则的原因是为了保持分支分类法的便利性。虽然生物分类中的便利性本身不一定是坏事，但当它的使用掩盖了获得更高水平的进化（和系统发育）信息内容时，就变得不可接受了。进化分歧和网状进化都是进化过程的重要组成部分，在生物分类中不能被忽视，并且对于高预测质量是必要的。
