Practical methods for the morphological recognition and definitionof genera, with a comment on polychaetes (Annelida)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29105/bys3.5-28Palabras clave:
natural groups, comparative morphology, experience, revisionsResumen
There are very few publications dealing with methods for the morphological recognition of genera, and how they can be defined, in comparison to those available dealing with species issues. My objective is to provide a historical review, synthesize and discuss some ideas or practical procedures about this problem. Genera are recognized because member species depict a general morphological pattern, and usually one or a few diagnostic characters separate each genus from other similar genera. Human mind detects patterns by comparative morphology and this explains why experience is extremely important in taxonomy. Analogy is also involved, because by understanding how character patterns help recognizing taxonomic groups, these patterns can be extrapolated in less well-known groups. From an historical perspective, botanists and zoologists perceived or defined genera differently with some common considerations and procedures. Genera are natural groups, size-variable and shape-conservative, that are recognized by different cultures. As explanatory hypothesis, genera are unstable and difficult to define because their contents are modified after the study of species from different localities; once planetary revisions are made, the resulting delineation is improved because variations are better understood or assimilated into current definitions. A necessary step for this improvement is the standardization of the terminology for morphologic features, but planetary revisions are the only means to reach this goal. As in other fields in systematic zoology, the recognition of genera among marine annelids (polychaetes) relied in a comparative approach, after the standardization of the terminology for body appendages. The study of larger collections with specimens from distant localities helped to clarify the morphological patterns, but their evaluation sometimes drove to contradictory conclusions, such as a widespread acceptance of cosmopolitan species. Although there are several pending issues, there has been a progressive improvement, especially after the inclusion of additional methods, but more efforts are needed for taxonomic training, and for improving the job market.
Descargas
Citas
Adanson, M. 1757. Histoire naturelle du Sénégal. Coquillages. C.J.B. Pauche, Paris, 190+xciv+275 pp, 19 Pls. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/11585#/summary
Adanson, M. 1763. Familles des Plantes. Vincent, Paris, 1186 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/271#/summary DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.271
Agassiz, A. 1871. Systematic zoology and nomenclature. American Naturalist. 5: 353-356 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2447062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/270781
Agassiz, L. 1859. An Essay on Classification. Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans & Roberts, London, 381 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/1831#/summary
Allmon, W.D. 1992. Genera in Paleontology: Definition and significance. Historical Biology. 6: 149-158. http://www.museumoftheearth.org/files/research/pubs/51_Allmon_%281992%29_Genera_in_Paleontology_Definition_and_Significance_Historical_Biology_6_%28149-158%29.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10292389209380424
Anderson, E. 1940. The concept of the genus, 2. A survey of modern opinion. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 67: 363-369 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2481069?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2481069
Anderson, E. 1957. An experimental investigation of judgements concerning genera and species. Evolution. 11: 260-263. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2406055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1957.tb02893.x
Anderson, R.M. (+ 27 coauthors). 1923 The genus debased. Auk. 40: 179-180. https://sora.unm.edu/node/12896 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4073754
Andrade, S.C.S., Novo, M., Kawauchi, G.Y., Worsaae, K., Pleijel, F., Gorobet, G. & Rouse, G.W. 2015. Articulating “archiannelids”: Phylogenomics and annelid relationships, with emphasis on meiofaunal taxa. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 32: 2860-2875. https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/molbev/msv157 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msv157
Asgharian, H., Sahafi, H.Y.H.A., Ardalan, A., Shekarriz, S. & Elahi, E. 2011. Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 barcode data of fish of the Nayband National Park in the Persian Gulf and analysis using meta-data flag several cryptic species. Molecular Ecology Resources. 11: 461-472. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2011.02989.x/abstract;jsessionid=833CFD4C26EFE25552BADAAF28D0B7B6.f02t03?userIsAuthenticated=false&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage= DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2011.02989.x
Atran, S. 1987. Origin of the species and genus concepts: An anthropological perspective. Journal of the History of Biology. 20: 195-279. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00138437#page-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138437
Aubert, D. 2015. A formal analysis of phylogenetic terminology: Towards a reconsideration of the current paradigm in Systematics. Phytoneuron. 2015-66: 1-54. http://www.phytoneuron.net/2015Phytoneuron/66PhytoN-PhylogeneticTerminology-pdf
Augener, H. 1913. Polychaeta 1. Errantia. Fauna Südwest-Australiens, Ergebnisse der Hamburger südwest-australischen Forschungreise 1905. 4: 64-304. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/31515#page/3/mode/1up
Avise, J.C. & Liu, J.-X. 2011. On the temporal inconsistencies of Linnean taxonomic ranks. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 102: 707-714. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01624.x/pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01624.x
Bailey, I.W. 1953. The anatomical approach to the study of genera. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 121-125.
Bakken, T. & Wilson, R.S. 2005. Phylogeny of nereidids (Polychaeta, Nereididae) with paragnaths. Zoologica Scripta. 34: 507-547. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1463-6409.2005.00200.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-6409.2005.00200.x
Barraclough, T.G. 2010. Evolving entities: towards a unified framework for understanding diversity at the species and higher levels. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B. 365: 1801-1813. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1547/1801 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0276
Barraclough, T.G., Nee, S. & Harvey, P.H. 1998. Sister-group analysis in identifying correlates of diversification. Evolutionary Ecology. 12: 751-754. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1017125317840 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017125317840
Barsanti, G. 2011. Linnaeus: The order of nature, the nature of man, and evolution. Journal of the Siena Academy of Sciences. 3: 61-65. ftp.fadoi.org/index.php/jsas/article/download/jsas.2011.61/344 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/jsas.2011.61
Bartlett, H.H. 1940. The concept of the genus, 1. History of the generic concept in Botany. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 67: 349-362. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2481068?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2481068
Bessey, C.E. 1908 The taxonomic aspect of the species question. American Naturalist. 42: 218-224. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2455533 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/278926
Bock, W.J. & Farrand, J. 1980. The number of species and genera of Recent birds: A contribution to comparative systematics. American Museum Novitates. 2703: 1-29. http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/handle/2246/5389
Bogert, C.M. 1943. Introduction. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 44: 107-108. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31296.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31296.x
Brazeau, M.D. 2011. Problematic character coding methods in morphology and their effects. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 104: 489-498. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01755.x/full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01755.x
Buffon, G.L.L. 1749-1768. Histoire naturelle Générale et Particuliére, avec la Description du Cabinet du Roi. 15 vols. Imprimerie Royal, Paris (http://www.buffon.cnrs.fr). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.169101
Burlando, B. 1990. The fractal dimension of taxonomic systems. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 146: 99-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80046-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80046-3
Burlando, B. 1993. The fractal geometry of evolution. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 163: 161-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1993.1114 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1993.1114
Cain, A.J. 1956. The genus in evolutionary taxonomy. Systematic Zoology. 5: 97-109. http://sysbio.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/3/97.extract DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2411572
Cain, A.J. 1958. Logic and memory in Linnaeus’ system of Taxonomy. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London. 169: 144-163. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1958.tb00819.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1958.tb00819.x
Callebaut, W. 2005. Again, what the philosophy of Biology is not. Acta Biotheoretica. 53: 93-122. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10441-005-5352-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-005-5352-7
Cambefort, Y. 2016. How general are genera? The genus in systematic zoology. In: Chemla, K., Chorlay, R. & Rabouin, D. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Generality in Mathematics and the Sciences. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 257-284. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198777267.013.8
Camp, W.H. 1940. The concept of the genus, 5. Our changing generic concepts. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 67: 381-389. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2481072?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2481072
Carr, C.M., Hardy, S.M., Brown, T.M., Mcdonald, T.A. & Hebert, P.D.N. 2011. A tri-oceanic perspective: DNA barcoding reveals geographic structure and cryptic diversity in Canadian polychaetes. PLoS ONE. 6(7), e22232, 12 pp. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0022232 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022232
Carrera-Parra, L. 2006. Phylogenetic analysis of Lumbrineridae Schmarda, 1861 (Annelida: Polychaeta). Zootaxa. 1332: 1-36. http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2006f/z01332p036f.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1332.1.1
Cavalier-Smith, T. 2010. Deep phylogeny, ancestral groups and the four ages of life. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B. 365: 111-132. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1537/111 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0161
Cave, M.S. 1953. Cytology and embryology in the delimitation of genera. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 140-153.
Chamberlin, R.V. 1919. The Annelida Polychaeta. Memoirs of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard. 48: 1-493. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/49195#/summary
Chambers, K.L. 1992. Evolution before Darwin: The musings of Constantine Rafinesque. Kalmiopsis. 1992: 5-9. http://www.npsoregon.org/kalmiopsis/kalmiopsis02/chambers1.pdf
Cifelli, R.L. & Kielan-Jaworowska, Z. 2005. Diagnosis: Differing interpretations of the ICZN. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 50: 650-652. http://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app50/app50-650.pdf
Clarke, D.J. 2011. Testing the phylogenetic utility of morphological character systems, with a revision of Creophilus Leach (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. 163: 723-812. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00725.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00725.x
Clayton, W.D. 1972. Some aspects of the genus concept. Kew Bulletin. 27: 281-287. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4109454?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4109454
Clayton, W.D. 1983. The genus concept in practice. Kew Bulletin. 38: 149-153. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4108098?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4108098
Collins, R.A. & Cruickshank, R.H. 2013. The seven deadly sins of DNA barcoding. Molecular Ecology Resources. 13: 969-975. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1755-0998.12046/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12046
Cronquist, A. 1978. Once again, what is a species? In: Romberger J.A., Foote R.H., Knutson L. & Lents P.L. (Eds), Beltsville Symposia in Agricultural Research, 2. Biosystematics in Agriculture: 3-20. Wiley, Montclair, 340 pp. [this is difficult to find; a pdf can be shared upon request].
Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. John Murray, London, 502 pp https://archive.org/details/onoriginofspec00darw DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.82303
de Blainville, H.-M. D. 1828. Vers. Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles. 57: 365-625. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/81595#page/371/mode/1up
de Candolle, A.P. 1815. Théorie Élémentaire de la Botanique, ou Exposition des Principes de la Classification Naturelle et de l’Art de Décrire et d’Etudier les Végétaux. Déterville, Paris, 500 pp (+ 25 unnumb pages for Index). http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/193841
de Candolle, A.P. 1820. Géographie Botanique. Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles. 18: 359-422. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/74506#page/365/mode/1up
de Hoog, G.S. 1981. Methodology of taxonomy. Taxon. 30: 779-783. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1220079.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1220079
de Jussieu, A.L. 1789. Genera Plantarum secundum Ordines Naturales Disposita, juxta Methodum in Horto Regio Parisiensi Exaratam, Anno MDCCLXXIV. Herissant, Paris, 594 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/284#/summary DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.284
de Mirbel, C.-F.B. 1828. Théorie Fondamentale de la Botanique. Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles. 53: 470-508. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/81615#page/480/mode/1up
de Quatrefages, A. 1864. Note sur la distribution géographique des annélides. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l’Academie des Sciences. 59: 170-174. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k3016q/f172.image.r=
de Quatrefages, A. 1865. Mémoire sur la distribution géographique des annélides. Nouvelles Archives du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 1: 1-14. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/49413#page/9/mode/1up
de Quatrefages, A. 1866(1865). Histoire Naturelle des Annéles Marins et d’Eau Douce: Annélides et Gephyreans. Librairie Encyclopédique de Roret, Paris, 2 vols, and atlas. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.122818
de Queiroz, K. & Gauthier, J. 1992. Phylogenetic taxonomy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 23: 449-480. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.es.23.110192.002313 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.23.110192.002313
de Saint-Hilaire, A. 1840. Leçons de Botanique, comprénant Principalement la Morphologie Végetale, la Terminologie, la Botanique Comparée, l’Examen de la Valeur des Caractères dans les divers Familles Naturelles, etc. Loss, Paris, 2 vols. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6540140c/f9.image.r=Lecons%20de%20Botanique
des Cilleuls, J. & Girard, V. 1968. L’étrange maladie de M.J.C. Lelorgne de Savigny, Naturaliste, Membre de l’Institute d’Egypte et de l’Académie des Sciences (1777-1851). Histoire des Sciences Médicales. 2: 29-40. http://www.biusante.parisdescartes.fr/sfhm/hsm/HSMx1968x002x001/HSMx1968x002x001x0029.pdf
DeSalle, R. 2007. Phenetic and DNA taxonomy; a comment on Waugh. BioEssays. 29: 1289-1290. http://desalle.amnh.org/pdf/DeSalle.2007.BioEssays.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.20667
di Carlo, J.J., Zoccolau, D. & Rust, N.C. 2012. How does the brain solve visual object recognition? Neuron. 73: 415-434. http://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273%2812%2900092-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.01.010
di Gregorio, M.A. 1982. In search of the Natural System: Problems of zoological classification in Victorian Britain. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. 4: 225-254 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23328374
Dubois, A. 1982. Some comments on the genus concept in Zoology. Monitore Zoologico Italiano, nova serie. 22: 27-44. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00269786.1988.10736539#.VpP1WFKaXKA
Dubois, A. 1988. The genus in zoology: a contribution to the theory of evolutionary systematics. Mémoires du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, série A, Zoologie. 140: 1-122.
Dubois, A. 2010. Describing new species. Taprobanica. 2: 6-24. http://tapro.sljol.info/articles/abstract/10.4038/tapro.v2i1.2703/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.47605/tapro.v2i1.24
Dubois, A. 2017. Diagnosis in zoological taxonomy and nomenclature. Bionomina. 12: 63-85 https://doi.org/10.11646/bionomina.12.1.8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/bionomina.12.1.8
Duméril, A.M.C. 1805(1806). Zoologie Analytique, ou Méthode Naturelle de Classification des Animaux rendue plus facile a l’aide de Tableaux Synoptiques. Allais, Paris, 344 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/44011#page/9/mode/1up (1806 is the date for the second printing and this is the BHL copy; See Gregory S.M.S. 2010. The two ‘editions’ of Duméril’s Zoologie analytique, and the potential confusion caused by Froriep’s translation Analytische Zoologie. Zoological Bibliography 1: 6-8 in http://www.iucn-tftsg.org/wp-content/uploads/file/Articles/Gregory_2010.pdf
Dumont, E.R., Dávalos, L.M., Goldberg, A., Santana, S.E., Rex, K. & Voigt, C.C. 2012. Morphological innovation, diversification and invasion of a new adaptive zone. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B. 279: 1797-1805. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/279/1734/1797 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2005
Dunn, E.R. 1943. Lower categories in Herpetology. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 44: 123-131. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31298.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31298.x
Dupuis, C. 1974. Pierre André Latreille (1762-1833): The foremost entomologist of his time. Annual Review of Entomology, 19:1-14. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.en.19.010174.000245 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.19.010174.000245
Eames, A.J. 1953. Floral anatomy as an aid in generic limitation. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 126-132.
Ebach, M.C., Williams, D.M. & Vanderlaan, T.A. 2013. Implementation as theory, hierarchy as transformation, homology as synapomorphy. Zootaxa. 364: 587-594. http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3641.5.7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3641.5.7
Ehlers, E. 1864. Die Borstenwürmer (Annelida: Chaetopoda) nach Systematischen und Anatomischen Untersuchungen, Erste Abtheilung. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig, 191 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/18348#page/5/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.2081
Envall, M. 2008. On the difference between mono-, holo-, and paraphyletic groups: a consistent distinction of process and pattern. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 94: 217-220. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.00984.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.00984.x
Eronen, J.T., Polly, P.D., Fred, M., Damuth, J., Frank, D.C., Mosbrugger, V., Scheidegger, C., Stenseth, N.C. & Fortelius, M. 2010. Ecometrics: the traits that bind the past and present together. Integrative Zoology. 5: 88-101. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-4877.2010.00192.x/epdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4877.2010.00192.x
Ezard, T.H.G., Quental, T.B. & Benton, M.J. 2016. The challenges of inferring the regulators of biodiversity in deep time. Philosophical Transactions Royal Society B. 371: 20150216, 11 pp, http://dc.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0216
Fabricius, J.C. 1775. Systema Entomologiae, sistens Insectorum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, adiectis Synonymis, Locis, Descriptionibus, Observationibus. Kortii, Flensburgi et Lipsiae, 832 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/82400#page/3/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.36510
Fabricius, J.C. 1776. Genera Insectorum eorumque Characteres Naturales Secundum Numerum, Figuram, Situm et Proportionem omnium Partium Oris Adiecta Mantissa Specieum Nuper Detectarum. M.F. Bartschii, Chilonii, 310 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/82410#page/5/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.65743
Fauchald, K. 1963. Nephtyidae (Polychaeta) from Norwegian waters. Sarsia. 13: 1-32. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00364827.1963.10409514#.VpQQwlKaXKA DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00364827.1963.10409514
Fauchald, K. 1968. Nephtyidae (Polychaeta) from the Bay of Nha Trang, South Viet Nam. Scientific Results of Marine Investigations of the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand 1959-1961, Naga Report. 4: 5-22, 5 Pls.
Fauchald, K. 1977. The polychaete worms: Definitions and keys to the orders, families and genera. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series. 28: 1-188. https://repository.si.edu/handle/10088/3435
Fauvel, P. 1897. Observations sur l’Eupolyodontes cornishii Buchanan (annélide polychète errante). Bulletin de la Société Linnéenne de Normandie, 5e série. 1: 88-112. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/17688#page/188/mode/1up
Fauvel, P. 1925. Bionomie et distribution géographique des annélides polychètes. In: Livre du Cinquantenaire de l'Université Catholique d'Angers: 307-317. Société Anonyme des Editions de l’Ouest, Angers,.
Filatov, M.V., Frade, P.R., Bak, R.P.M., Vermeij, M.J.A. & Kaandorp, J.A. 2013. Comparison between colony morphology and molecular phylogeny in the Caribbean scleractinian coral genus Madracis. PLoS ONE. 8(8), e71287, 6 pp. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0071287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071287
Fitzhugh, K. 2006. DNA barcoding: An instance of technology-driven Science? BioScience. 56: 462-463. http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/56/6/462.full.pdf+html DOI: https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[462:DBAIOT]2.0.CO;2
Fitzhugh, K. 2012. The limits of understanding in biological systematics. Zootaxa. 3435: 40-67. http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2012/f/zt03435p067.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3435.1.2
Fitzhugh, K., Nogueira, J.M.M., Carrerette, O. & Hutchings, P. 2015. An assessment of the status of Polycirridae genera (Annelida: Terebelliformia) and evolutionary transformation series of characters within the family. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. 174: 666-701. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/zoj.12259/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/zoj.12259
Folta, K.M. 2015. Molecular-genetic extensions of Vavilov’s predictions. HortScience. 50: 777-779. https://hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/pdfs/777.full.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.50.6.777
Foote, M. 2012. Evolutionary dynamics of taxonomic structure. Biology Letters. 8: 135-138. http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/16/rsbl.2011.0521 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2011.0521
Fransen, C.H.J.M. 2002. Taxonomy, phylogeny, historical biogeography, and historical ecology of the genus Pontonia (Crustacea: Decapoda: Caridea: Palaemonidae). Zoologische Verhandelingen. 336: 1-433. www.vliz.be/imisdocs/publications/213124.pdf
Garbino, G.S.T. 2015. How many marmoset (Primattes: Cebidae: Callitrhichinae) genera are there? A phylogenetic analysis based on multiple morphological systems. Cladistics. 31: 652-678. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cla.12106/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12106
Gillis, W.T. 1971. The systematics and ecology of Poison-Ivy and Poison-Oaks (Toxicodendron, Anacardiaceae). Rhodora. 73: 72-159, 161-237, 370-443, 465-540. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/124398
Gould, S.J. 2000. The Lying Stones of Marrakech: Penultimate Reflections in Natural History. Harmony, New York, 368 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674063372
Grasshoff, J.L. 1975. Metastevia (Compositae: Eupatorieae): A new genus from Mexico. Brittonia. 27: 69-73. http://link.springer.com/article/10.2307%2F2805648 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2805648
Grassle, J.P., Gelfman, C.E. & Mills, S.W. 1987. Karyotypes of Capitella sibling species, and of several species in the related genera Capitellides and Capitomastus (Polychaeta). Bulletin of the Biological Society Washington. 7: 77-88.
Greenman, J.M. 1940. The concept of the genus, 3. Genera from the standpoint of Morphology. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 67: 371-374. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2481070?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2481070
Griffing, L.R. 2011. Who invented the dichotomous key? Richard Waller’s watercolors of the herbs of Britain. American Journal of Botany. 98: 1911-1923. http://www.amjbot.org/content/98/12/1911.full DOI: https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1100188
Grube, E.A. 1850. Die Familien der Anneliden. Archiv für Naturgeschichte. 16: 249-364. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/51061#page/257/mode/1up
Grube, E.A. 1851. Die Familien der Anneliden mit Angabe ihrer Gattungen und Arten. Ein systematischer Versuch (The new section is entitled as Uebersicht der Annelidengattungen und Arten zu ihrer vorläufigen Unterscheidung; pp 117-164). Nicolai’schen Buchhandlung, Berlin, 164 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/101174#page/5/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.46818
Hagen, J. 2003. The statistical frame of mind in Systematic Biology from Quantitative Zoology to Biometry. Journal of the History of Biology. 36: 353-384. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1024479322226 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024479322226
Hall, E.R. 1943. Criteria for vertebrate subspecies, species and genera: the mammals. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 44: 141-144. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31300.x/pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31300.x
Hamilton, A. & Wheeler, Q.D. 2008. Taxonomy and why History of Science matters for Science: A case study. Isis. 99: 331-340. http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/588691 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/588691
Hamy, E.-T. 1892. Hommage a la Mémoire de M.A. de Quatrefages de Bréau. Discours prononcé a l’Ouverture du Cours d’Anthropologie du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, le 31 Mai 1892. Ernest Leroux, Paris, 24 pp. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6571729j.r=
Hartman, O. 1938. The types of the polychaete worms of the families Polynoidae and Polyodontidae in the United States National Museum and the description of a new genus. Proceedings of the United States National Museum. 86: 107-134. http://library.si.edu/digital-library/book/proceedingsofuni861940unit DOI: https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00963801.86-3046.107
Hartman, O. 1955. Endemism in the North Pacific Ocean, with emphasis on the distribution of marine annelids, and descriptions of new or little known species. In: Essays in the Natural Sciences in Honor of Captain Allan Hancock on the Occasion of his Birthday: 39-60. University of Southern California, Los Angeles. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/27606#page/55/mode/1up
Hartman, O. 1968. Atlas of the Errantiate Polychaetous Annelids from California. Allan Hancock Foundation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 828 pp.
Hartman, O. 1969. Atlas of the Sedentariate Polychaetous Annelids from California. Allan Hancock Foundation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 812 pp.
Hebert, P.D.N., Stoeckle, M.Y., Zemlak, T.S. & Francis, C.M. 2004. Identification of birds through DNA barcodes. PLoS Biology. 2(10), e 312, 7 pp. http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020312 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020312
Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Systematics. Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana, 263 pp.
Hitchcock, A.S. 1921. The type concept in systematic Botany. American Journal of Botany. 8: 251-255. https://archive.org/details/jstor-2434993 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1921.tb05622.x
Holt, B.G. + 14 coauthors. 2013. An update of Wallace’s zoogeographic regions of the world. Science. 339: 74-78. https://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6115/74.full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1228282
Hołyński, R.B. 2005. Philosophy of science from a taxonomist’s perspective. Genus. 16: 469-502. http://www.biol.uni.wroc.pl/cassidae/Philosophy%20taxonomy.pdf
Hoquet, T. 2005. Les Fondaments de la Botanique: Linné et la Classification des Plantes. Vuibert, Paris, 290 pp.
Hörandl, E. & Stuessy, T.F. 2010. Paraphyletic groups as natural units of biological classification. Taxon. 59: 1641-1653. http://www.explorelifeonearth.org/cursos/Hoerandl_Stuessy_2010.PDF DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.596001
Hubbs, C.L. 1943. Criteria for subspecies, species and genera, as determined by researches on fishes. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 44: 109-121. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/74997/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31297.x.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31297.x
Hutchinson, G.E. 1957. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology. 22: 414-427. http://www2.unil.ch/biomapper/Download/Hutchinson-CSHSymQunBio-1957.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/SQB.1957.022.01.039
Inger, R.F. 1958. Comments on the definition of genera. Evolution. 12: 370-384. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2405859?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1958.tb02967.x
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1987. Opinion 1461: A ruling on the authorship and dates of the text volumes of the Histoire naturelle section of Savigny’s Description de l’Égypte. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 44, 219-220. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/388
Ipucha, M.C., Santos, C.G., Lana, P.C. & Sbalqueiro, I.J. 2007. Cytogenetic characterization of seven South American species of Nereididae (Annelida: Polychaeta): Implications for the karyotypic evolution. Journal of Basic & Applied Genetics. 18: 27-38. www.scielo.org.ar/pdf/bag/v18n2/v18n2a03.pdf
Jaafar, T.N.A.M., Taylor, M.I., Nor, S.A.M., de Bruyn, M. & Carvalho, G.R. 2012. DNA barcoding reveals cryptic diversity within commercially exploited Indo-Malay Carangidae (Teleosteii: Perciformes). PLoS ONE. 7(11), e49623, 16 pp. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049623 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0049623
Jablonski, D. & Finarelli, J.A. 2009. Congruence of morphologically defined genera with molecular phylogenies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106: 8262-8266. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2688841/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0902973106
Janssen, A., Kaiser, S., Meißner, K., Brenke, N., Menot, L. & Martínez Arbizu, P. 2015. A reverse taxonomic approach to assess macrofaunal distribution patterns in abyssal polymetallic nodule fields. PLoS ONE. 10(2), e0117790, 26 pp. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0117790 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117790
Jenyns, L. 1833. Some remarks on genera and subgenera, and on the principles on which they should be established. Magazine of Natural History, 6: 385-390. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19636#page/399/mode/1up
Johns, G.C. & Avise, J.C. 1998. A comparative summary of genetic distances in the vertebrates from the mithocondrial cytochrome b gene. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 15: 1481-1490. http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/johncavise/files/2011/03/192-cyt-b-summary.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025875
Just, T. 1953. Generic synopses and modern taxonomy. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 103-114.
Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow. Macmillan, New York, 512 pp.
Kawano, K. 2000. Genera and allometry in the stag beetle family Lucanidae, Coleoptera. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 93: 198-207. http://aesa.oxfordjournals.org/content/aesa/93/2/198.full.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1603/0013-8746(2000)093[0198:GAAITS]2.0.CO;2
Kellog, V.L. 1902. The development and homologies of the mouth parts of insects. American Naturalist. 36: 683-706. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2453776?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/278203
Kemp, T.S. 2016. The Origin of Higher Taxa: Palaeobiological, Developmental and Ecological Perspectives. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 201 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199691883.001.0001
Kinberg, J.G.H. 1857-1910. Annulater (with a postscript by H. Théel). Kongliga Svenska Fregatten Eugenies resa Omkring under bafäl af C.A. Virgin, Ånnen 1851-1853, Zoologi. 3: 1-77, Pls 1-29.
Kitcher, P. 1984. Species. Philosophy of Science. 51: 308-333. http://155.97.32.9/~mhaber/Documents/Course%20Readings/Kitcher_Species_PhiSci_1984.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/289182
Kociolek, J.P. & Williams, D.M. 2015. How to define a diatom genus? Notes on the creation and recognition of taxa, and a call for revisionary studies of diatoms. Acta Botanica Croatiana. 74: 195-210. http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/botcro.2015.74.issue-2/botcro-2015-0018/botcro-2015-0018.xml DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/botcro-2015-0018
Kodric-Brown, A., Sibly, R.M. & Brown, J.H. 2006. The allometry of ornaments and weapons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 103: 8733-8738. http://www.pnas.org/content/103/23/8733.full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0602994103
Kreft, H. & Jetz, W. 2013. Comment on “An update of Wallace´s zoogeographic regions of the world. Science. 341: 343-344. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6144/343.3.full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237471
Krug, A.Z., Jablonski, D. & Valentine, J.W. 2008. Species-genus ratios reflect a global history of diversification and range expansion in marine bivalves. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B. 275: 1117-1123. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/275/1639/1117 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2007.1729
Kurzweil, R. 2012. How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed. Viking, New York, 352 pp.
Kvist, S. 2016. Does a global DNA barcoding gap exist in Annelida? Mitochondria DNA A, DNA Mapping, Sequencing and Analysing. 27: 2241-2252. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25431824
Kvist, S. & Siddall, M.E. 2013. Phylogenomics of Annelida revisited: A cladistic approach using genome-wide expressed sequence tag data mining and examining the effects of missing data. Cladistics. 29: 435-448. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cla.12015/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12015
Lamarck, J.B. 1786a. Espece (Species). Encyclopédie Méthodique, Botanique. 2: 395-396. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/15260#page/397/mode/1up
Lamarck, J.B. 1786b. Genres (des plantes), Genera Plantarum. Encyclopédie Méthodique, Botanique. 2: 630-634. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/15260#page/632/mode/1up
Lamarck, J.B. 1809. Philosophie Zoologique. Dentu, Paris, 2 vols. http://www.lamarck.cnrs.fr/ice/ice_book_detail-fr-text-lamarck-ouvrages_lamarck-29-1.html
Lamarck, J.B. 1818. Classe Neuvième: Les Annelides. Histoire Naturelle des Animaux sans Vertèbres. 5: 274-374. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k64280058
Latreille, P.A. 1796. Précis des Caracteres Génériques des Insectes, disposés dans un Ordre Naturel. Bordeaux, Paris, 201 (+ 7 unnumb. pp). http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/58411#/summary DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.58411
Latreille, P.A. 1806. Genera Crustaceorum et Insectorum Secundum Ordinem Naturalem in Familias Disposita, Iconibus Exemplisque. Amand Kœnig, Paris, 3 vols. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/34916#/summary DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.65741
Latreille, P.A. 1808. Notice biographique sur Jean Chrétien Fabricius, conseiller d’état du roi de Dannemarck, professeur d’histoire naturelle et d’economie rurale à Kiell, et membre d’un grand nombre d’académies. Annales du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle. 11: 393-404.
Lawrence, G.H.M. 1953. Plant genera: Their nature and definition. The need for an expanded outlook. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 117-120.
Lawrence, G.H.M., Bailey, I.W., Eames, A.J., Rollins, R.C., Cave, M.S. & Mason, H.L. 1953. Plant Genera: Their Nature and Definition. A symposium. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 89-160.
Lee, M.S.Y & Palci, A. 2015. Morphological phylogenetics in the genomic age. Current Biology. 25: R922-R929. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.009
Legendre, P. 1971. Circumscribing the concept of the genus. Taxon. 20: 137-139. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1218542?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1218542
Legendre, P. 1972. The definition of systematic categories in Biology. Taxon. 21: 381-406. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1219102?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1219102
Legendre, P. & Vaillancourt, P. 1969. A mathematical model for the entities species and genus. Taxon. 18: 245-252. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1218824?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1218824
Leitão, A., Carvalho, S., Ben-Hamadou, R. & Gaspar, M.B. 2010. Cytogenetics of Hediste diversicolor (Annelida: Polychaeta) and comparative karyological analysis within Nereididae. Aquatic Biology. 10: 193-200. http://www.int-res.com/articles/ab2010/10/b010p193.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/ab00278
Lemen, C.A. & Freeman, P.W. 1984. The genus: A macroevolutionary problem. Evolution. 38: 1219-1237. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1022&context=natrespapers DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1984.tb05645.x
Leroy, J.-F. 1956. Tournefort (1656-1708). Revue d’Histoire des Sciences et de leurs Applications. 9: 350-354. http://www.persee.fr/doc/rhs_0048-7996_1956_num_9_4_4372 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/rhs.1956.4372
Linnaeus, C. 1737. Genera Plantarum, Eorumque Characteres Naturales secundum Numerum, Figuram, Situm, & Proportionem omni fructificationis Partium. Conrad Wishoff, Lugduni Batavorum (Leiden), 384 pp (+ Index in 20 unnumb. pp) http://linnean-online.org/120003/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.70902
Linnaeus, C. 1751. Philosophia Botanica in qua explicantur Fundamenta Botanica cum Definitionibus Partium, Exemplis Terminorum, Observationibus Rariorum. Kiesewetter, Stockholm, 362 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/37652#/summary DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.37652
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema Naturae per Regna Tria Naturae, secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 824 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/80764#page/3/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.542
Linnaeus, C. 1767. Systema Naturae per Regna Tria Naturae, secundum Classes, Ordines, Genera, Species, cum Characteribus, Differentiis, Synonymis, Locis. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 3 volumes. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/137337#page/5/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.157601
Linnaeus, C. 1790. Disquisitio de Sexu Plantarum cum Annotationibus D. Jacobi Eduardi Smith et P.M. Aug. Broussonet. Amoenitates Academicae 10(9):100-131. http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/botanik/periodical/pageview/4611455
Lubischew, A. 1969. Philosophical aspects of Taxonomy. Annual Review of Entomology. 14: 19-38. www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/.../annurev.en.14.010169.00031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.14.010169.000315
Macleay, W.S. 1819. Horæ Entomologicæ: Essays on the Annulose Animals. Bagster, London (part 2 publ. 1821), 524 pp. https://archive.org/details/horaeentomologic112macl DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.48636
Maggenti, A.R. 1989. Genus and family: concepts and natural groupings. Revue de Nématologie. 12: 3-6. http://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/pleins_textes_5/pt5/nemato/27743.pdf
Malik, V. 2017. The genus: a natural or arbitrary entity. Plant Archives, 17: 251-257.
Maruvka, Y.E., Shnerb, N.M., Kessler, D.A. & Ricklefs, R.E. 2013. Model for macroevolutionary dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110: E2460-E2469. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3703965/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1220014110
Mason, H.L. 1953. Plant geography in the delimitation of genera: The role of plant geography in taxonomy. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 154-159.
Maurer, B.A., Brown, J.H. & Rusler, R.D. 1992. The micro and macro in body size evolution. Evolution. 46: 939-953. http://biology.unm.edu/jhbrown/Documents/Publications/MaurerBrown%26Rusler1992E.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1992.tb00611.x
Mayr, E. 1943. Criteria of subspecies, species, and genera in Ornithology. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 44: 133-139. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31299.x/pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31299.x
Mayr, E. & Ashlock, P.D. 1991. Principles of Systematic Zoology, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 475 pp.
Mayr, E., Linsley, E.G. & Usinger, R.L. 1953. Methods and Principles of Systematic Zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York, 336 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1440379
McGregor, R.C. 1921- Genera and species. Condor. 23: 127-129. https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/condor/v023n04/p0127-p0129.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1362475
McNeill, J. 1972. The hierarchical ordering of characters as a solution to the dependent character problem in numerical taxonomy. Taxon. 21: 71-82. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1219225?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1219225
McVaugh, R. 1945. The genus Triodanis Rafinesque, and its relationships to Specularia and Campanula. Wrightia. 1: 13-52. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/15463#page/31/mode/1up
Merz, R.A. & Woodin, S.A. 2006. Polychaete chaetae: Function, fossils, and phylogeny. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 46: 481-496. http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/content/46/4/481.full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/icj057
Milne-Edwards, H. 1838. Classe Neuvième: Les Annelides. Histoire Naturelle des Animaux sans Vertèbres, deuxième édition. 5: 499-639.
Minelli, A. 2014. Book Review: The Nature of Classifications: Relationships and Kinds in the Natural Sciences. Systematic Biology. 63: 844-846. https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/63/5/844/2847793/The-Nature-of-Classification-Relationships-and DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu032
Minelli, A., Fusco, G. & Sartori, S. 1991. Self-similarity in biological classifications. BioSystems. 26: 89-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0303-2647(91)90040-R DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0303-2647(91)90040-R
Monro, C.C.A. 1928. Papers from Dr. Th. Mortensen’s Pacific Expedition 1914-16, 45. On the Polychaeta collected by Dr. Th. Mortensen off the coast of Panama. Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra Dansk Naturhistorisk Forening. 85: 75-103.
Mosquin, D. 2012. Constantine Rafinesque, a flawed genius. Arnoldia. 70: 2-10. http://arnoldia.arboretum.harvard.edu/pdf/articles/2012-70-1-constantine-rafinesque-a-flawed-genius.pdf
Müller-Wille, S. 2005. La science baconienne en action: La place de Linné dans l’histoire de la taxonomie; pp 57-102 In Hoquet T. (Ed.), Les Fondaments de la Botanique: Linné et la Classification des Plantes. Vuibert, Paris, 290 pp.
Müller-Wille, S. 2007. Collection and collation: Theory and practice in Linnaean Botany. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences. 38: 541-562. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848607000428 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2007.06.010
Müller-Wille, S. 2013. Systems and how Linnaeus looked at them in retrospect. Annals of Science. 70: 305-317. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00033790.2013.783109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00033790.2013.783109
Müller-Wille, S. & Charmantier, I. 2012. Natural history and information overload: The case of Linnaeus. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences. 43: 4-15. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848611001130 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2011.10.021
Müller-Wille, S. & Reeds, K. 2007. A translation of Carl Linnaeus’s introduction to Genera Plantarum (1737). Studies in History of Philosophy and Biomedical Sciences. 38: 563-572. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848607000349 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2007.06.003
Nelson, G. 1978. From Candolle to Croizat: Comments on the History of Biogeography. Journal of the History of Biology. 11: 269-305. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00389302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00389302
Newman, M.E.J. 2005. Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law. Contemporary Physics. 46: 323-351. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0412/0412004v3.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00107510500052444
Nicholson, D.J. & Gawne, R. 2015. Neither logical empiricism nor vitalism, but organicism: what the philosophy of biology was. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. 37: 345-381. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40656-015-0085-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-015-0085-7
Ohler, A. & Dubois, A. 1999. The identity of Elachyglossa gyldenstolpei Andersson, 1916 (Amphibia, Ranidae), with comments on some aspects of statistical support to taxonomy. Zoologica Scripta. 28: 269-279. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1463-6409.1999.00002.x/pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1463-6409.1999.00002.x
Olson, E. 1991. George Gaylord Simpson, 1902-1984. National Academy of Sciences, Biographical Memoir, 25 pp. http://www.nasonline.org/publications/biographical-memoirs/memoir-pdfs/simpson-george.pdf
Padial, J.M. & de la Riva, I. 2007. Integrative taxonomists should use and produce DNA barcodes. Zootaxa. 1586: 67-68. http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/120859/1/Zootaxa%201586%2067-68%20%282007%29.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1586.1.7
Palàu y Verdèra, A. 1778. Explicación de la Filosofía y Fundamentos Botánicos de Linneo, con la que se Aclaran y Entienden Fácilmente las Instituciones Botánicas de Tournefort. Antonio de Sancha, Madrid, 306 pp, 9 Pls. https://books.google.es/books/about/Explicacion_de_la_filosofia_y_fundamento.html?id=wo1QAzpe5JoC&hl=es
Páll-Gergely, B. 2017. Should we describe genera without molecular phylogenies? Zootaxa. 4232: 593-596. http://mapress.com/j/zt/article/view/zootaxa.4232.4.11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4232.4.11
Pallary, P. 1931. Les manuscrits et les vélins de Savigny. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 2ème série. 3: 711-720. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k55294762/f9.image.r=Pallary%20P
Panchen, A.L. 1992. Classification, Evolution, and the Nature of Biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 403 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511565557
Parry, L.A., Edgecombe, G.D., Eibye-Jacobsen, D. & Vinther, J. 2016. The impact of fossil data on annelid phylogeny inferred from discrete morphological characters. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B. 283: 20161378, 9 pp. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royprsb/283/1837/20161378.full.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.1378
Pavlinov, I.Y. 2011. Concepts of rational Taxonomy in Biology. Biology Bulletin Reviews. 1: 225-244. http://zmmu.msu.ru/personal/pavlinov/doc/rat_tax_e.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079086411030078
Pesch, C.G. & Mueller, C. 1988. Chromosome complements from two populations of the marine worm Neanthes arenaceodentata (Annelida: Polychaeta). Ophelia. 28: 163-167. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00785326.1988.10430810 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00785326.1988.10430810
Pleijel, F., Jondelius, U., Norlinder, E., Nygren, A., Oxelman, B., Schander, C., Sundberg, P. & Thollesson, M. 2008. Phylogenies without roots? A plea for the use of vouchers in molecular phylogenetic studies. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 48: 369-371. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105579030800136X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2008.03.024
Portères, R. 1950. La variation parallèle. Revue Internationale de Botanique Appliquée et d’Agriculture Tropicale. 30: 468-481. https://hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/pdfs/777.full.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/jatba.1950.6350
Proches, S. & Ramdhani, S. 2012. The world’s zoogeographical regions confirmed by cross-taxon analyses. BioScience. 62: 260-270. http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/62/3/260.abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.3.7
Purschke, G., Bleidorn, C. & Struck, T. 2014. Systematics, evolution and phylogeny of Annelida - a morphological perspective. Memoirs of Museum Victoria. 71: 247-269. http://museumvictoria.com.au/pages/58031/247-270_mmv71_purschke_2bpz_web.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.24199/j.mmv.2014.71.19
Radulovici A.E., Arcchambault, P. & Dufresne, F. 2010. DNA barcodes for marine biodiversity: Moving fast forward? Diversity. 2: 450-472. http://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/2/4/450 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/d2040450
Rafinesque, C.S. 1836. Flora Telluriana, First Part. Probasco, Philadelphia, 103 pp. https://archive.org/details/floratelluriana00rafi DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.7751
Ramsbottom, J. 1938. Linnaeus and the species concept. Proceedings of the Linnean Society, London. 1938: 192-219. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1938.tb00181.x/pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1938.tb00181.x
Raven, P.H., Berlin, B. & Breedlove, D.E. 1971. The origins of Taxonomy. Science. 174: 1210-1213. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/174/4015/1210.long DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.174.4015.1210
Regan, C.T. 1926. Organic evolution. British Association for the Advancement of Science, Report of the 93rd Meeting, Southampton 1925, Aug. 26-Sep. 2. 75-86. London, 494 pp. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/117948
Reindl, A., Strobach, T., Becker, C., Scholtz, G. & Schubert, T. 2015. Crab or lobster? Mental principles underlying the categorization of crustaceans by biology experts and non-experts. Zoologischer Anzeiger. 256: 28-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcz.2015.03.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcz.2015.03.001
Reish, D.J., Anderson, F.E., Horn, K.M. & Hardege, J. 2014. Molecular phylogenetics of the Neanthes acuminata (Annelida: Nereididae) species complex. Memoirs of Museum Victoria. 71: 271-278. http://museumvictoria.com.au/pages/58033/271-278_mmv71_reish_4pz_web.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.24199/j.mmv.2014.71.20
Ridgway, R. 1923. Generic subdivision: The genus debased. Auk. 40: 371-375. https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/auk/v040n02/p0371-p0375.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4073876
Roemer, F. 1880. Adolph Eduard Grube. Leopoldina, Kaiserlichen Leopoldina-Carolinischen Deutschen Akademie der Naturforscher. 16: 114-117.
Rogers, D.P. 1958. The Philosophy of Taxonomy. Mycologia. 50: 326-332. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3756070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00275514.1958.12024730
Rogers, D.J. & Appan, S.G. 1969. Taximetric methods for delimiting biological species. Taxon. 18: 609-624. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1218915?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1218915
Rollins, R.C. 1953. Cytogenetical approaches to the study of genera. Chronica Botanica. 14(3/4): 133-139.
Rose, H. (1775) The Elements of Botany: Containing the History of the Science (with Accurate Definitions of all the Terms of Art, exemplified in Eleven Copper-Plates; The Theory of Vegetables; The Scientific Arrangement of Plants, and Names used in Botany; Rules concerning the general History, Virtues, and Uses of Plants, Being a Translation of the Philosophia Botanica, and other Treatises of the celebrated Linnaeus). Cadell & Hingeston, London, 471 pp, 11 Pls. https://archive.org/details/elementsofbotany00rose
Round, F.E. 1997. Genera, species and varieties - are problems real or imagined? Diatom. 13: 25-29. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/diatom1985/13/0/13_25/_article
Rubinoff, D., Cameron, S. & Will, K. 2006. A genomic perspective on the shortcomings of mitochondrial DNA for ‘barcoding’ identification. Journal of Heredity. 97: 581-594. http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/content/97/6/581.full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esl036
Saint-Hilaire, I.G. 1832. Considérations sur les caractères employés en Ornithologie pour la distinction des genres, des familles et des orders, et Détermination de plusieurs genres nouveaux. Nouvelles Annales du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 1: 357-397. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/103417#page/403/mode/1up
Salazar-Vallejo, S.I. 2019. Reflexiones sobre cómo llegar a ser un buen taxónomo. Biología Sociedad. 00: 00-00. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29105/bys2.4-35
Salazar-Vallejo, S.I., Carrera-Parra, L.F., González, N.E. & Salazar-González, S.A. 2014. Biota portuaria y taxonomía; pp 33-54 In: Low-Pfeng, A.M., Quijón, P.A. & Peters-Recagno, E.M. (Ed.), Especies Invasoras Acuáticas: Casos de Estudio en Ecosistemas de México.. SEMARNAT, INECC & Univ. Prince Edward Island, México, 643 pp. Available: http://www2.inecc.gob.mx/publicaciones/consultaPublicacion.html?id_pub=713
Salazar-Vallejo, S.I. & González, N.E. 2016. Crisis múltiples en taxonomía, implicaciones para la biodiversidad y recomendaciones para mejorar la situación. Códice, Boletín Científico y Cultural del Museo Universitario, Universidad de Antioquia. 17: 42-56. https://issuu.com/muua/docs/c__dice_29_web
Salazar-Vallejo, S.I. & Hutchings, P. 2012. A review of characters useful in delineating ampharetid genera (Polychaeta). Zootaxa. 3402: 45-53. http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2012/f/z03402p053f.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3402.1.3
Savigny, J.-C. 1822. Système des Annelides, principalement de celles des côtes de l’Égypte et de la Syrie, offrant les caractères tant distinctifs que naturels des Ordres, Familles et Genres, avec la Description des Espèces. Description de l’Égypte, Histoire Naturelle, 1(3), 1-128, Pls 1-5 (first edition 1820, as indicated in page 128; second edition 1826). http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/193034#page/8/mode/1up
Sbordoni, V. 2010. Strength and limitations of DNA barcode under the multidimensional species perspective. In: Nimis, P.L. & Lebbe, R.V. (Ed.), Tools for Identifying Biodiversity: Progress and Problems: 275-280. Edizioni Universitàdi Trieste, Trieste, 455 pp. http://www.openstarts.units.it/dspace/handle/10077/3790
Sclater, P.L. 1858. On the general geographical distribution of the members of the Class Aves. Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society, London, Zoology. 2: 130-136. http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/35033#page/140/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.1858.tb02549.x
Seifert, B. 2014. A pragmatic species concept applicable to all eukaryotic organisms independent from their mode of reproduction or evolutionary history. Soil Organisms. 86: 85-93 https://zenodo.org/record/218030
Sherborn, C.D. 1897. On the dates of the Natural History portion of Savigny’s ‘Description de l’Égypte.’ Proceedings of the Zoological Society, London. 1897: 285-288. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/97165#page/349/mode/1up
Sherff, E.E. 1940. The concept of the genus, 4. The delimitations of genera from the conservative point of view. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 67: 375-380. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2481071?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2481071
Sigwart, J.D., Sutton, M.D. & Bennett, K.D. 2018. How big is a genus? Towards a nomothetic systematics. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 183: 237-252. https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article-abstract/183/2/237/4554320?redirectedFrom=fulltext DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlx059
Simpson, G.G. 1943. Criteria for genera, species, and subspecies in Zoology and Paleozoology. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 44: 145-178. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31301.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1943.tb31301.x
Simpson, G.G. 1944. Tempo and Mode in Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York, 237 pp.
Simpson, G.G. 1945. The principles of classification and a classification of mammals. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 85: 1-350. http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/handle/2246/1104
Sinha, P. 2002. Recognizing complex patterns. Nature Neuroscience, Supplement. 5: 1093-1097. http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v5/n11s/full/nn949.html DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn949
Sivarajan, V.V. & Robson, N.K.B. 1991. Introduction to the Principles of Plant Taxonomy. 2nd ed., Univ. Cambridge Press, Cambridge, 295 pp.
Stadler, T., Rabosky, D.L., Ricklefs, R.E. & Bokma, F. 2014. On age and species richness of higher taxa. American Naturalist. 184: 447-455. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/677676?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/677676
Stafleu, F.A. 1971. Lamarck: The birth of Biology. Taxon. 20: 397-442. http://www.blc.arizona.edu/courses/schaffer/449/Lamarck/Stafleu%20-%20Birth%20of%20Biol.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1218244
Stearn, W.T. 1959. The background of Linnaeus’s contributions to the nomenclature and methods of Systematic Biology. Systematic Zoology. 8: 4-22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2411603 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/sysbio/8.1.4
Stevens, P.F. 1985. The genus concept in practice: But for what practice? Kew Bulletin. 40: 457-465. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4109605?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4109605
Stevens, P.F. 1994. The Development of Biological Systematics: Antoine-Laurent de Jussieu, Nature, and the Natural System. Columbia University Press, New York, 627 pp.
Stevens, P.F. 1997. Mind, memory and history: How classifications are shaped by and through time, and some consequences. Zoologica Scripta. 26: 293-301. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1463-6409.1997.tb00419.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-6409.1997.tb00419.x
Stevens, P.F. 2002. Why do we name organisms? Some reminders from the past. Taxon. 51: 11-26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1554959.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1554959
Stevens, P.F. 2009. Characters, taxonomic groups, and relationships in Botany 1770-1850 as exemplified by the work of Henri Cassini. Taxon. 58: 32-42 http://www.jstor.org/stable/27756821 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.581006
Stoeckle, M. 2003. Taxonomy, DNA, and the barcode of life. BioScience. 53: 796-797. http://barcoding.si.edu/BackgroundPublications/BioScience03_Sept_View_Stoeckle.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0796:TDATBC]2.0.CO;2
Strand, M. & Panova, M. 2015. Size of genera - biology or taxonomy? Zoologica Scripta. 44: 106-116. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/zsc.12087/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/zsc.12087
Strickland, H.E. 1841. On the true Method of discovering the Natural System in Zoology and Botany. Annals and Magazine of Natural History. 6: 184-194. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/139444#page/214/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03745484009443283
Strickland, H.E., Phillips, J., Richardson, J., Owen, R., Jenyns, L., Broderip, W.J., Henslow, J.S., Shuckard, W.E., Waterhouse, G.R., Yarrell, W., Darwin, C. & Westwood, J.O. 1843. Series of propositions for rendering the Nomenclature of Zoology uniform and permanent, being the report of a Committee for the consideration of the subject appointed by the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Annals and Magazine of Natural History. 11: 259-275. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19570#page/283/mode/1up DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03745484309445300
Struck, T.H. 2011. Direction of evolution within Annelida and the definition of Pleistoannelida. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research. 49: 340-345. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1439-0469.2011.00640.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0469.2011.00640.x
Struck, T.H. 2013. The impact of paralogy on phylogenomic studies - A case study on annelid relationships. PLoS ONE. 8(5): e62892, 22 pp. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0062892 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062892
Struck, T.H., Paul, C., Hill, N., Hartmann, S., Hösel, C., Kube, M., Lieb, B., Meyer, A., Tiedemann, R., Purschke, G. & Bleidorn, C. 2011. Phylogenomic analyses unravel annelid evolution. Nature. 471: 95-98. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v471/n7336/full/nature09864.html DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09864
Stuessy, T.F. 2009a. Plant Taxonomy: The Systematic Evaluation of Comparative Data. 2nd ed., Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 538 pp.
Stuessy, T.F. 2009b. Paradigms in biological classification (1707-2007): Has anything really changed? Taxon. 58: 68-76. http://www.ktriop.bio.ug.edu.pl/upload/preview/7b100a2d1e90c9587c9f9532778914c7.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.581010
Svenson, H.K. 1945. On the descriptive method of Linnaeus. Rhodora, Journal of the New England Botanical Club. 47: 273-302, 363-388. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/14517#page/420/mode/1up
Tollit, M.E. 1986. Dates and authorship of the text volumes of the Histoire Naturelle section of Savigny’s Description de l’Égypte. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. 43: 107-110. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/388 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.388
Tournefort, P. 1694. Elemens de Botanique, ou Methode pour Connoître les Plantes. Imprimerie Royale, Paris, 2 vols. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8454361d/f9.item
Turrill, W.B. 1942a. Taxonomy and phylogeny, 1. Introduction and historical development of plant classification. Botanical Review. 8: 247-270. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4353269 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02882229
Turrill, W.B. 1942b. Taxonomy and phylogeny, 2. Taxonomic and phylogenetic concepts and criteria, and data used in classification and phylogenetic studies. Botanical Review. 8: 473-532 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4353275 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02881043
Turrill, W.B. 1942c. Taxonomy and phylogeny, 3. Classification and phylogeny in the major groups, Logical as opposed to phylogenetic classifications, Phylogenetic diagrams, Conclusions, and Epilogue. Botanical Review. 8: 655-707 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4353279 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02879054
Tuxen, S.L. 1967 The entomologist, J.C. Fabricius. Annual Review of Entomology. 12: 1-15. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.en.12.010167.000245 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.12.010167.000245
Tyrl, R.J. 2010. “Being a method proposed for the ready finding ... to what sort any plant belongeth”. Oklahoma Native Plants Record. 10: 77-84. http://ojs.library.okstate.edu/osu/index.php/ONPR/article/viewFile/422/402 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.17.100078
Varma, C.S. 2013. Beyond Set Theory: The Relationships between Logic and Taxonomy from the early 1930 to 1960. Ph D. Diss., Univ. Toronto, 329 pp. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/68972
Vasilyeva, L.N. 1999. Systematics in Mycology. Bibliotheca Mycologica. 178: 1-253.
Vasilyeva, L.N. & Stephenson, S.L. 2010. The problems of traditional and phylogenetic taxonomy of fungi. Mycosphere. 1: 45-51. http://www.mycosphere.org/pdfs/MC1_5.pdf
Vasilyeva, L.N. & Stephenson, S.L. 2012. The hierarchy and combinatorial space of characters in evolutionary systematics. Botanica Pacifica. 1: 21-30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273492790_The_Hierarchy_and_Combinatorial_Space_of_Characters_in_Evolutionary_Systematics DOI: https://doi.org/10.17581/bp.2012.01103
Vasilyeva, L. & Stephenson, S.L. 2013. “I have come to some conclusions that shock me …” Mycosystema. 32: 321-329. http://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jwxb/EN/Y2013/V32/I3/321
Vavilov, N.I. 1922. The law of homologous series in variation. Journal of Genetics. 12: 47-89. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02983073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02983073
Vinarski, M.V. 2013. One, two, or several? How many lymnaeid genera are there? Rutenica. 23: 41-58. http://www.biotaxa.org/Ruthenica/article/viewFile/1020/1669
Voss, E.G. 1952. The history of keys and phylogenetic trees in systematic biology. Journal of Science Laboratory, Denison University, 43, 1-25 (difficult to find; a pdf is available upon request).
Wadhawan, V. 2014. Kurzweil’s pattern-recognition theory of mind, 1 & 2. http://vinodwadhawan.blogspot.in/2014/03/125-kurzweils-pattern-recognition.html, http://vinodwadhawan.blogspot.mx/2014/04/126-kurzweils-pattern-recognition.html
Wallace, A.R. 1876. The Geographical Distribution of Animals, with a Study of the Relations of Living and Extinct Faunas as elucidating the past Changes of the Earth Surface. Harper & Brothers, New York, 2 vols. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.46581
Wallace, A.R. 1895. The method of organic evolution. Fortnightly Review, new series. 57: 211-224, 435-445. http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S510.htm
Ward, L. 2005. The publications of Kristian Fauchald and the polychaete taxa named in those works. Marine Ecology. 26: 145-154. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1439-0485.2005.00068.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0485.2005.00068.x
Ward, R.D., Zemlak, T.S, Innes, B.H., Last, P.R. & Hebert, P.D.N. 2005. DNA barcoding Australia’s fish species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 360: 1847-1857. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/360/1462/1847.long DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1716
Warren, L. 2004. Constantine Samuel Rafinesque: A Voice in the American Wilderness. University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, 252 pp.
Weigert, A., Helm, C., Meyer, M., Nickel, B., Arendt, D., Hausdorf, B., Santos, S.R., Halanych, K.M., Purschke, G., Bleidorn, C. & Struck, T.H. 2014. Illuminating the base of the annelid tree using transcriptomics. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 31: 1391-1401. http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/23/molbev.msu080 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msu080
Wheeler, Q.D. 2008. Undisciplined thinking: Morphology and Hennig’s unfinished revolution. Systematic Entomology. 33: 2-7. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2007.00411.x/full DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2007.00411.x
Wilkins, J.S. & Ebach, M.C. 2014. The Nature of Classification: Relationships and Kinds in the Natural Sciences. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 197 pp.
Williams, C.B. 1951. A note on the relative sizes of genera in the classification of animals and plants. Proceedings of the Linnean Society, London. 162: 171-175. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1951.tb00610.x/abstract DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1951.tb00610.x
Williams, R.L. 2001. Botanophilia in Eighteenth-Century France: The Spirit of Enlightment. Archives Internationales d'Histoire des Idées. 179: 1-206. http://www.springer.com/la/book/9780792368861
Winsor, M.P. 2001. Cain on Linnaeus: The scientist-historian as unanalysed entity. Studies on the History of Philosophy, Biology and Biomedical Sciences. 32: 239-254. http://www.marypwinsor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Winsor2001a-Cain-Linn.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8486(01)00010-3
Winsor, M.P. 2003. Non-essentialist methods in pre-Darwinian taxonomy. Biology and Philosophy. 18: 387-400. http://www.marypwinsor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Winsor-2003-NonEssentialist-Methods.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024139523966
Winsor, M.P. 2006. Linnaeus Biology was not essentialist. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden. 93: 2-7. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40035041?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents DOI: https://doi.org/10.3417/0026-6493(2006)93[2:LBWNE]2.0.CO;2
Winsor, M.P. 2009. Taxonomy was the foundation of Darwin’s evolution. Taxon. 58: 43-49. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27756822.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.581007
Winston, J.E. 1999. Describing Species: Practical Taxonomic Procedure for Biologists. Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 518 pp.
Zaddach, G. 1880. Adolph Eduard Grube. Gedächtnissrede gehalten in der Physikalisch-ökonomischen Gessellschaft zu Königsberg. Königsberg, 17 pp.
Zakharov, E.V., Lobo, N.F., Nowak, C. & Hellmann, J.J. 2009. Introgression as a likely cause of mtDNA paraphyly in two allopatric skippers (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Heredity. 102: 590-599. http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v102/n6/full/hdy200926a.html DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2009.26
Zander, R.H. 2013. A Framework for Post-Phylogenetic Systematics. Zetetic Publications, Saint Louis, 209 pp.
Zapata, F. & Jiménez, I. 2012. Species delimitation: Inferring gaps in morphology across geography. Systematic Biology. 61: 179-194. http://sysbio.oxfordjournals.org/content/61/2/179.long DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr084
Zrzavý, J., Říha, P., Piálek, L. & Janouškovec, J. 2009. Phylogeny of Annelida (Lophotrochozoa): Total evidence analysis of morphology and six genes. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 9: 189, 14 pp. http://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-9-189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-189