Kluge Arnold G, Wolf Alan J
Museum of Zoology and Department of Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, U.S.A.
Cladistics. 1993 Jun;9(2):183-199. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1993.tb00217.x.
Abstract- Cladistics has changed considerably with the availability of new methods and sources of data, and the increasing realization that cladograms are relevant to all manner of historical questions. Criticisms of, and justifications for, consensus hypotheses in phylogenetic inference are reviewed. The conclusion is overwhelmingly against taxonomic congruence which deliberately seeks consensus propositions. The total evidence approach is not so burdened. A preference for suboptimal cladograms is also critized, as is the protocol for mapping characters of special interest onto a phylogenetic hypothesis derived from other evidence. The bootstrap and jackknife resampling techniques are questioned because their underlying assumptions are violated and they are sensitive to character frequencies. These findings suggest that cladistics is being redefined in ways that contradict the practices and principles responsible for its pre-eminence in phylogenetic inference.
摘要——随着新方法和数据来源的出现，以及人们越来越认识到分支图与各类历史问题相关，分支系统学已经发生了很大变化。本文回顾了系统发育推断中对共识假设的批评和辩护。结论是压倒性地反对刻意寻求共识命题的分类一致性。总证据法没有那么沉重的负担。对次优分支图的偏好也受到批评，将特别感兴趣的特征映射到从其他证据得出的系统发育假设上的方案同样如此。自展法和刀切法重采样技术也受到质疑，因为它们的基本假设被违反，并且它们对特征频率敏感。这些发现表明，分支系统学正在以与使其在系统发育推断中占据卓越地位的实践和原则相矛盾的方式被重新定义。
