Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 681

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Populations, Genetic Variation, and the Delimitation of Phylogenetic Species

Davis, J. I, Nixon, K. C.·1992·Systematic Biology

Abstract

Systematists should distinguish between cladistic analysis, i.e., a numerical procedure, and phylogenetic analysis, i.e., the reconstruction of hierarchic descent relationships. Modern cladistic analysis uses parsimony to construct hierarchic arrangements (trees) of terminal units (terminals) that have been scored for a series of attributes. The interpretation of cladistic relationships as representative of phylogenetic relationships requires two conditions, both of which were identified by Hennig (1966, Phylogenetic systematics, Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana). First, descent relationships among the terminals must be hierarchic; that is, all terminals must have been generated by the subdivision or replication of previously existing ancestors. This is a necessary condition for phylogenetic analysis, rather than an empirical discovery of it, because the results of cladistic analysis are always hierarchically structured (however poorly resolved). Because resolution of a cladistic hierarchy does not demonstrate that a hierarchic descent system underlies the character distribution pattern it reflects, additional information is necessary, in any given case, to determine that phylogenetic analysis is appropriate. Second, to have congruence between an observable attribute hierarchy and the descent hierarchy that is to be inferred, the attribute must have been transmitted from an ancestor to all of its descendants, either in its original state or in a modified state. Both conditions are met by asexual organisms and by nonrecombining genetic elements (e.g., the chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes) but not by individual sexually reproducing organisms that bear such genetic elements. Populations of sexually reproducing organisms can meet the first condition (i.e., hierarchic descent) when new populations are founded by the division of previously existing populations and individuals do not disperse among existing populations. When the first condition is met, the second also is met for genetically fixed attributes of the populations, because populations descended from an ancestral population that was fixed for an attribute also will be fixed for that attribute (in original or modified state). In contrast, attributes that are not fixed in a population may not occur in all or any descendant populations, even if descent relationships among populations are hierarchic. The occurrence of a unique fixed character combination in an extended genealogical population (phylogenetic species sensu Nixon and Wheeler, 1990, Cladistics 6:211-223) is evidence that this population has diverged from other such populations and thus that descent relationships among such populations are hierarchic. The fixed characters of phylogenetic species therefore constitute evidence that a hierarchic descent system exists and provide the means for analyzing phylogenetic relationships among these species. Phylogenetic species can be delimited by a procedure (population aggregation analysis) that involves a search for fixed differences among local populations, followed by successive rounds of aggregation of populations and previously aggregated population groups that are not distinct from each other

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sysbio/41.4.421

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Davis, J. I., & Nixon, K. C.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
1992-12-01
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
421-435
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W1963904211
Cited by
681
References
0
FWCI
7.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.