<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I am in favor of these changes.<br>
<br>
Michel<br>
<br>
On 29/10/12 16:19, Cantino, Philip wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:39950AE6-9781-43F8-85DA-D7027045AD40@ohio.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div class="BodyFragment">
<font size="2">
<div class="PlainText">Folks,<br>
<br>
This is a worthwhile discussion that should definitely be
continued, but I realize now that I made a mistake in even
including the glossary definition of Taxon in this round of
voting. This was the one entry in David's Sept. 29 set of
comments that I suggested we postpone because it will take a
while to work through the many uses of the term "taxon" in
the code. In my Oct. 24 message in which I inserted replies
to David's comments, I noted that we agreed to defer voting
on the glossary definition of Taxon---but I unfortunately
forgot to remove this item from the list of changes that we
are voting on right now. My apologies for the confusion!<br>
<br>
The attached document is identical to the one I sent you on
Friday except that I have deleted the glossary definition of
Taxon as one that we are voting on at this time. I am not
trying to suppress discussion of this item. We will return
to this and related changes in the code (and also revision
of Art. 21), but after many months of discussion, I think it
is best that we vote on the several changes that no one has
expressed disagreement about. <br>
<br>
I suggested on Friday that we call a vote on this set of
changes today if there were no comments by Sunday and if no
one objected to this schedule. No one has objected to the
schedule, and the only comments are on the glossary
definition of Taxon, so let's please vote on the other
changes (attached). Please send your vote to this listserv
by this Friday (Nov. 2). [If someone feels this is
insufficient time in which to vote, please say so, but we
have been discussing the CBM proposal for months.]<br>
<br>
Phil<br>
<br>
</div>
</font>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment">
<font size="2">
<div class="PlainText"><br>
<br>
<br>
On Oct 29, 2012, at 10:56 AM, de Queiroz, Kevin wrote:<br>
<br>
> When it comes to the definition of "clade", it's a bit
over-simplified to declare that other people are simply
wrong. They would argue that the definition of "clade" is
"an ancestral _species_ and all of its descendants".
Moreover, some of them might also argue that it is useful to
distinguish terminologically between groups composed of an
ancestor and all of its descendants that conform (more or
less) to a nested hierarchical pattern (species, uniparental
organisms) and those that do not (biparental organisms).<br>
> <br>
> Kevin<br>
> ________________________________________<br>
> From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cpn-bounces@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn-bounces@listserv.ohio.edu</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cpn-bounces@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn-bounces@listserv.ohio.edu</a>] On Behalf Of David
Marjanovic [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:david.marjanovic@gmx.at">david.marjanovic@gmx.at</a>]<br>
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 1:29 AM<br>
> To: Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature<br>
> Subject: Re: [CPN] next set of CBM-related proposals<br>
> <br>
>> I do not favor Mike's proposed revision (of the
definition of<br>
>> "taxon") for the following reason: some people view
clades/higher<br>
>> taxa not as monophyletic groups of organisms but as
monophyletic<br>
>> groups of species.<br>
> <br>
> They're wrong. "Clade" = "an ancestor and all its
descendants", even if<br>
> that's a small part of a species or partially overlaps
with one or<br>
> several species. The PhyloCode allows the naming of
LITUs, as it should.<br>
> <br>
> Besides, under most species concepts, not only are
"speciation" and<br>
> "cladogenesis" not synonyms*, but neither is even a
subset of the other;<br>
> inevitably, then, clades will usually contain entire
species and parts<br>
> of other species under those species concepts.<br>
> <br>
> * Although lots of people, even in the primary
literature, use<br>
> "speciation" when they mean "cladogenesis". It's as if
almost nobody<br>
> even knew the latter term.<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> CPN mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> CPN mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</font>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
CPN mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
UMR 7207
Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle
Batiment de Géologie
Case postale 48
43 rue Buffon
F-75231 Paris cedex 05
FRANCE
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www2.mnhn.fr/hdt203/info/laurin.php">http://www2.mnhn.fr/hdt203/info/laurin.php</a></pre>
</body>
</html>