[Taxacom] Catalog of Life Taxonomic Tree

Thu Feb 25 18:01:49 CST 2016

The fundamental problem here is the relationship between taxonomy and phylogeny. It *really* isn't appropriate for the likes of CoL to be worrying about phylogeny, being, as it is, so very inconclusive and unstable. A "catalogue of life" should try to play down phylogeny as much as it can, and focus instead on cataloguing life. But, as per usual, everybody wants everything optimised to everything that they could possibly want, inevitably resulting in little more than one big mess!

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 26/2/16, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Catalog of Life Taxonomic Tree
 To: "Kenneth Kinman" <kinman at hotmail.com>
 Cc: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "Stoner, Dan" <dstoner at acis.ufl.edu>
 Received: Friday, 26 February, 2016, 11:41 AM

 Hi Ken, Dan et al., the
 "missing" algal phyla and classes
 (photosynthetic
 protists and their
 relatives) are no longer in Cat. of Life since they were
 formerly supplied from AlgaeBase which is no
 longer a CoL partner. So yes,
 I would
 imagine that this tree does reflect present CoL coverage.

 Regards - Tony

 Tony Rees, New South Wales,
 Australia
 https://about.me/TonyRees

 On 26 February 2016 at 08:38,
 Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com>
 wrote:

 > Hi Dan,     
   It is not the Catalog of Life, because they have all
 the
 > included Phyla (see below).  On
 the other hand, this tree that is
 >
 supposedly based on the Catalog of Life has omitted entire
 Phyla:
 > Anthoceratophyta, Charophyta,
 Chlorophyta, Glaucophyta, Rhodophyta,
 >
 Cryptista, Haptophyta, and Ochrophyta (the latter which
 often divided into
 > numerous other
 phyla).  I don't know if it is just photosynthetic
 phyla
 > that were omitted from his tree,
 but didn't want to waste more time
 >
 looking.  And it isn't much of a tree if Phylum
 Arthropoda isn't listed
 > next to the
 other Ecdysozoan phyla.  As I said, this tree needs a lot
 of
 > work.
 >
 ----------------Ken------------------------------------------------------------
 >
 > Chromista Phylum
 Bigyra Phylum Cercozoa Phylum Ciliophora Phylum Cryptista
 > Phylum Foraminifera Phylum Haptophyta
 Phylum Miozoa Phylum Ochrophyta
 > Phylum
 Oomycota Phylum Radiozoa    Plantae Phylum
 Anthocerotophyta Phylum
 > Bryophyta
 Phylum Charophyta Phylum Chlorophyta Phylum Glaucophyta
 Phylum
 > Marchantiophyta Phylum
 Rhodophyta Phylum Tracheophyta
 >
 >
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 >
 > > From: dstoner at acis.ufl.edu
 > > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > > Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:56:42
 +0000
 > > Subject: [Taxacom]  Catalog
 of Life Taxonomic Tree
 > >
 > > (This time with edited subject)
 > >
 > >
 > > Hi Kenneth,
 >
 >
 > > > This "tree"
 needs a lot of work
 > >
 > > Are your comments about the
 visualization itself or the underlying
 >
 source data (in this case, Catalogue of Life)?
 > >
 > > Thanks,
 > >
 > > Dan
 Stoner
 > > iDigBio / ACIS
 Laboratory
 > > University of
 Florida
 > >
 >
 >
 > >
 > >
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 > >
 > > Message:
 1
 > > Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 08:41:56
 +0100
 > > From: rch <rch at skynet.be>
 > > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > > Subject: [Taxacom] Catalog of Life
 Taxonomic Tree
 > > Message-ID: <56C96A44.3030802 at skynet.be>
 > > Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
 > >
 >
 >
 > >     Have you seen
 the remarkable
 > > 
    Catalog of Life Taxonomic Tree  ?
 > >         http://taxontree.bpodgursky.com/
 > >
 > > 
    Brief explanation at
 >
 >         http://bpodgursky.com/2016/02/20/catalog-of-life-taxonomic-tree/
 > >
 > > 
    Found thanks to this morning's Hackers
 News
 > >     «Complete
 tree of life visualization using d3 and Catalog of Life»
 > >
 > >     
 Richard H
 > >
 >
 >
 > >
 > >
 ------------------------------
 > >
 > > Message: 2
 > >
 Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:56:47 -0600
 >
 > From: Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com>
 > > To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 > > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Catalog of
 Life Taxonomic Tree
 > > Message-ID:
 <SNT148-W65DE58BBD02581D1C81134C1A20 at phx.gbl>
 > > Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset="iso-8859-1"
 > >
 > > Hi all,                  I
 can't say that I would recommend this
 > so-called "tree".  It is not
 only incomplete, but it is not really a tree
 > (just a series of interconnected
 bushes).
 > >        The most
 noticeable is the omission of a lot of photosynthetic
 > phyla, such as Chlorophyta and Rhodophyta,
 and especially most taxa in
 > Kingdom
 Chromista (where are the diatoms, phaeophytes,
 xanthophytes,
 > chrysophytes, etc.). 
 This "tree" needs a lot of work.
 > >
 >
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > >
 _______________________________________________
 > > Taxacom Mailing List
 > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 > > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
 be searched at:
 > http://taxacom.markmail.org
 > >
 > > Channeling
 Intellectual Exuberance for 29 years in 2016.
 >
 >
 _______________________________________________
 > Taxacom Mailing List
 >
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at:
 > http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >
 > Channeling
 Intellectual Exuberance for 29 years in 2016.
 >
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

 Channeling Intellectual
 Exuberance for 29 years in 2016.