Taxacom: strict cladists war against paraphyletic taxa

[Mikhail Daneliya]

I have been working with amphipod crustaceans, and there is a freshwater
genus Gammarus. Everyone probably knows it. Its 200+ species look very
similar. It is hard to doubt they belong to the same genus. Suddenly DNA
phylogenetics, and have done too, discovers that the Lake Baikal radiation
of amphipods - numerous endemic families, genera and species of very
bizarre looking creatures - clearly nests within Gammarus. Would anyone
dare to desintegrate Gammarus because of its paraphaly? This looks like the
way evolution goes.

Sincerely,

Mikhail Daneliya

On Fri, 12 Dec 2025, 01:42 Kenneth Kinman via Taxacom, <taxacom at lists.ku.edu>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>      The war of strict cladists against paraphyletic taxa has been going
> on for over 50 years.  My question is how successful that war has been in
> regarding formal paraphyletic taxa as "unnatural" and to be eliminated.
>  Or as noted below, does strict cladism actually promote "disastrous
> nomenclatural practices"?
>                         -------------Ken Kinman
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Paraphyly again defended (and strict cladism promotes "disastrous
> nomenclatural practices)
> Kenneth Kinman kinman at hotmail.com<mailto:taxacom%40mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> ?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BTaxacom%5D%20Paraphyly%20again%20defended%20%28and%20strict%20cladism%20promotes%0A%20%22disastrous%20nomenclatural%20practices%29&In-Reply-To=%3CCY4PR11MB1480D1096C914E58FD056F53C1240%
> 40CY4PR11MB1480.namprd11.prod.outlook.com%3E>
> Mon Apr 15 20:20:45 CDT 2019
>
>   *   Previous message: [Taxacom] holotype designation<
> https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2019-April/132964.html>
>   *   Next message: [Taxacom] Paraphyly again defended (and strict cladism
> promotes "disastrous nomenclatural practices)<
> https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2019-April/132971.html>
>   *   Messages sorted by: [ date ]<
> https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2019-April/date.html#132970> [
> thread ]<
> https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2019-April/thread.html#132970> [
> subject ]<
> https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2019-April/subject.html#132970> [
> author ]<
> https://lists.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2019-April/author.html#132970>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Hi All,
>       I just ran across this 2016 paper.  Yet another publication
> defending the reality and need for paraphyletic taxa (for a variety of
> reasons), and it labels strict cladism as promoting "disastrous
> nomenclatural practices":
>
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.microbiologyresearch.org%2Fdocserver%2Ffulltext%2Fijsem%2F66%2F12%2F4924_ijsem001474.pdf%3Fexpires%3D1555377331%26id%3Did%26accname%3Dguest%26checksum%3D537594F4A96BABC3F0564A74650291D5&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cee68e2b667e04ff28b9908de397681d2%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C639011378486699155%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C60000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=L8bcH5N1HX%2F%2F%2FdjkWqcPiEc7v5Nf%2B9oZWstqWKFCOWM%3D&reserved=0
>
> Abstract:
> "Yeast systematics has wholeheartedly embraced the phylogenetic approach.
> Central to this has been the unspoken convention that taxa at all ranks be
> strictly monophyletic. This can result in a proliferation of small genera
> and instances of nomenclatural instability, counter to the expected benefit
> of phylogenetic systematics. But the literature abounds with examples, at
> all taxonomic levels, where paraphyly is a reality that can no longer be
> ignored. The very concepts of Bacteria or Archaea, under the constraint of
> monophyly, are in peril. It is therefore desirable to effect a shift in
> practices that will recognize the existence of paraphyletic taxa."
>
> Another Quote from the articles:
> "Taxonomy sits at an ill-defined confluence of science, craft, ontology
> and the law. Conscientious systematists aim at making sense of the living
> world by organizing species into categories that are meaningful not only to
> themselves, but also to other biologists and the rest of humanity. The last
> decades have seen undue emphasis placed on creating categories that reflect
> an erroneous model of cladogenesis, one that is strictly dichotomous and
> symmetrical. A large proportion of taxa arise not by fission of an
> ancestral progenitor, but by a budding process that leaves the progenitor
> enriched by the presence of its offspring. The retention of cohesive parent
> taxa under a single designation, at the same rank as progeny taxa, has the
> potential to prevent disastrous nomenclatural practices."
>
>                 ------------------------Ken Kinman
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for 38 years, 1987-2025.
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>
>
>