Palaeobotanical systematics for the phylogenetic age: applying organspecies, formspecies and phylogenetic species concepts in a framework of reconstructed fossil and extant wholeplants
Authors:
Abstract
A typical vascular landplant consists of ten to twelve definable organs. Most plant fossils have been disarticulated into their component organs, which must therefore be correlated if the fossil plant is to be understood holistically and compared with its presumed descendants in the extant flora. The resulting conceptually reconstructed wholeplants are the crown jewels of palaeobotany, as they permit full morphological comparison with extant plants and provide templates that guide through reciprocal illumination further attempts at reconstruction. Each of the three lines of evidence facilitating wholeplant reconstruction (association/dissociation, morphological similarity and organic connection) yields only a probability statement that the organs in question have been successfully correlated. Disarticulation means (1) that phenotypic variation can be studied only at the level of individual organs, and (2) that in order to be distinguished from all other kinds of the same organ, an organ must bear a unique morphological character state (autapomorphy). In our terminology, each definable kind of organ is an organspecies. The few organspecies perceived as possessing autapomorphies (and thus as unique) are termed autapospecies, whereas the remaining organspecies characterise more than one wholeplant species and hence are termed formspecies. The distinction between autapospecies and formspecies is dependent on the range of taxa sampled and is wholly characterbased; the age of the fossils under comparison is irrelevant, and the state of preservation is relevant only through its influence on the range of characters that can realistically be scored. None of the many other species concepts recognised by (palaeo)biologists is applicable to fossil plants. Our ability to apply this phylogeneticallyinspired approach and terminology to formal taxonomy has been increasingly compromised by modifications to successive editions of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature , culminating in the 2001 and 2006 Codes which reduced palaeobotanical provision to the fatally overgeneralised 'morphotaxon' concept. A more conceptually rigorous, palaeobotanically informed revision of the Code , placing nomenclature more clearly in the service of taxonomy, would strengthen the crucial roles of reconstructed plants within palaeobotany and of palaeobotany within 21st Century science.Keywords
This publication has 82 references indexed in Scilit:
- (213–214) Proposals to clarify the application of the term “morphotaxon” in Fossil plant nomenclatureTaxon, 2004
- An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG IIBotanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 2003
- Challenges for taxonomyNature, 2002
- Phylogeny of Isoëtes (Lycopsida): resolving basal relationships using rbcL sequencesTaxon, 2002
- The Rhizomorphic Lycopsids: A Case-Study in Paleobotanical ClassificationSystematic Botany, 1996
- EVOLUTIONARY‐DEVELOPMENTAL CHANGE IN THE GROWTH ARCHITECTURE OF FOSSIL RHIZOMORPHIC LYCOPSIDS: SCENARIOS CONSTRUCTED ON CLADISTIC FOUNDATIONSBiological Reviews, 1994
- The war of the whorls: genetic interactions controlling flower developmentNature, 1991
- Some Lower Carboniferous pteridosperm cupules bearing ovules and microsporangiaEarth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1977
- XXXII.—On Old Red Sandstone Plants showing Structure, from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part IV. Restorations of the Vascular Cryptogams, and Discussion of their bearing on the General Morphology of the Pteridophyta and the Origin of the Organisation of Land-PlantsTransactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 1921
- FOREIGN POLLEN IN THE OVULES OF GINKGO AND OF FOSSIL PLANTSNew Phytologist, 1915