Monophyly and paraphyly: A discourse without end?
Abstract:The ongoing discourse on monophyly versus paraphyly shows apparent lack of mutual understanding among schools of biological taxonomy. The principal reason behind the frozen disagreement is that these terms were redefined repeatedly. Although terminological discrepancy has long been recognized, relatively few attempts have been made to clarify this. As a consequence, contemporary taxonomy still uses three different definitions of monophyly, and therefore paraphyly. Resolution is possible provided that the terms (a) monophyly and paraphyly are used for diachronous classifications and phylogenetic trees; (b) monoclady and paraclady for synchronous classifications and cladograms of contemporaneous organisms; and (c) monothety and non-monothety for groups in classifications derived by the pattern cladistic approach.
Document Type: Short Communication
Affiliations: Department of Plant Taxonomy and Ecology, Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary;, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Publication date: August 1, 2010
Impact Factor (2015): 2.9
Taxon electronic back issues (1950-2001) have been released in 2005
Submission of manuscripts: www.editorialmanager.com/taxon
- Information for Authors
- Subscribe to this Title
- Membership Information
- Information for Advertisers
- Regnum Vegetabile and Taxonomic Literature online
- Taxon electronic back issues (1950-2001) hosted by JSTOR
- Free access for IAPT members: please login at
- Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites