Diversity, nomenclature, and taxonomy of protists
Diversity, nomenclature, and taxonomy of protists
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/10635150701494127
复制
发表时间：
2007-01-01
影响因子：
6.5
通讯作者：
Spiegel, Frederick
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Adl, Sina M.;Leander, Brian S.;Spiegel, Frederick
国际原生生物学家学会（International Society of Protistologists）对原生生物的新分类（Adl et al.，2005年）不能同时适用《国际植物学命名规则》和《国际动物学命名规则》，因为两者不相容。该分类为每个分支指定了一个名称，其中来自不同代码的多个名称以前已经存在，追溯当局，并提供了基于无名等级的分类。在此，我们回顾仍有待解决的重要问题。目前的规则管理新物种的验证，从各种命名法，已成为一个新的原生生物命名的障碍。原生生物物种描述和模式标本的标准要求需要现代化，以适应通过现代显微镜和分子技术快速发现新物种。虽然我们同意Phylocode的支持者对植物学和动物学代码的批评，但我们并不都同意目前的Phylocode是解决方案，也不认为它目前解决了物种分型问题。因此，需要新的指南来管理原生生物物种描述和分类的标准。在过去的25年里，分子系统发育研究导致了对真核生物传统分类方案的广泛修改。最引人注目的变化发生在原生生物中，多细胞生物就是从原生生物进化而来的。许多原生生物群和它们所包含的属的名称已经改变了很多次，以至于分类方案不清楚，很难确定哪些名称适用。最近的两篇综述提供了关于真核生物分支的整体组织的现代系统发育观点（Keeling et al.，2005; Simpson and Roger，2004）.
The new classification of protists from the International Society of Protistologists (Adl et al., 2005) could not apply both the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature and the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature because the two are incompatible. The classification designated one name for each clade where multiple names from different codes had previously existed, traced authorities, and provided a classification based on nameless ranks. Here we review important issues that remain to be resolved. Current rules governing validation of new species, from various codes of nomenclature, have become an impediment to naming of new protists. Standard requirements for protist species descriptions and type specimens need to be modernized to accommodate the rapid discovery of new species made possible by modern microscopic and molecular techniques. Although we agree with the criticisms of the botanical and zoological codes made by proponents of the Phylocode, we did not all agree that the current Phylocode is the solution, nor does it currently address species typih'cation. Accordingly, new guidelines are needed to govern standards in protist species descriptions and classification. Over the past 25 years, molecular phylogenetic studies have led to extensive modification of traditional classification schemes for eukaryotes. The most dramatic changes have occurred within protists, from which multicellular organisms evolved. The names of many protist groups and the genera they include have been changed so many times that the classification scheme is unclear, and it is difficult to determine which names apply. Two recent reviews have provided a modern phylogenetic perspective on the overall organization of eukaryote clades (Keeling et al., 2005; Simpson and Roger, 2004).