Read more
Aims to make sense of the rise of phylogenetic systematics - its methods, its objects of study, and its theoretical foundations - with contributions from historians, philosophers, and biologists. This title also aims to provide frameworks for answering the question: how did systematics become phylogenetic?
List of contents
List of Contributors
Introduction
Andrew Hamilton
Part One. Historical Foundations
1. Reflections on the History of Systematics
Robert E. Kohler
2. Willi Hennig’s Part in the History of Systematics
Michael Schmitt
3. Homology as a Bridge between Evolutionary Morphology, Developmental Evolution, and Phylogenetic Systematics
Manfred D. Laubichler
Part Two. Conceptual Foundations
4. Historical and Conceptual Perspectives on Modern Systematics: Groups, Ranks, and the Phylogenetic Turn
Andrew Hamilton
5. The Early Cladogenesis of Cladistics
Olivier Rieppel
6. Cladistics at an Earlier Time
Gareth Nelson
7. Patterson’s Curse, Molecular Homology, and the Data Matrix
David M. Williams and Malte C. Ebach
8. History and Theory in the Development of Phylogenetics in Botany: Toward the Future
Brent D. Mishler
Part Three. Technology, Concepts, and Practice
9. Well-Structured Biology: Numerical Taxonomy’s Epistemic Vision for Systematics
Beckett Sterner
10. A Comparison of Alternative Form-Characterization: Approaches to the Automated Identification of Biological Species
Norman MacLeod
11. The New Systematics, the New Taxonomy, and the Future of Biodiversity Studies
Quentin Wheeler and Andrew Hamilton
Index
About the author
Andrew Hamilton is Associate Dean in the Honors College at the University of Houston.
Summary
Aims to make sense of the rise of phylogenetic systematics - its methods, its objects of study, and its theoretical foundations - with contributions from historians, philosophers, and biologists. This title also aims to provide frameworks for answering the question: how did systematics become phylogenetic?
Additional text
"The Evolution of Phylogenetic Systematics succeeds in offering useful historical context for understanding the current state of systematics but also shows the consequences of the continued absence of a philosophically rigorous foundation with which to justify the variety of opinions regarding its operation—good fodder for the continued evolution of systematics."
