DOCSLIB.ORG

The Origins of Species Concepts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Origins of Species Concepts The origins of species concepts History, characters, modes, and synapomorphies John Simpson Wilkins Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November, 2003 The Origins of Species Concepts Abstract The longstanding species problem in biology has a history that suggests a solution, and that history is not the received history found in many texts written by biologists or philosophers. The notion of species as the division into subordinate groups of any generic predicate was the staple of logic from Aristotle through the middle ages until quite recently. However, the biological species concept during the same period was at first subtly and then overtly different. Unlike the logic sense, which relied on definitions of the essence of both genus and species, biological species from the time of Epicurus were consistently considered to involve a reproductive element: in short, living species relied not on essential definitions, but on the generative cause, which might not be definable. I term this the generative conception of species: species were the generation by reproduction of form. This undercuts the claim that species before Darwin were essentialist, and divorces the notion of a type from that of essence. In fact, as late as the end of the nineteenth century, logicians explicitly treated biological “species” as a homonym only of logical essentialist species, and permitted considerable deviation from the type or form. At every point, species in logic were thought to be a subset, in effect, of some more general notion. I sketch a history of both philosophical and biological traditions of the species concept, before turning to the current conceptions. These are reconsidered in the light of this history, and in particular Mayr’s changing views are shown to be somewhat Whiggish, historiographically. Of the many touted biological species concepts, only one of which (Mayr’s) is called the Biological Species Concept, none appears to capture all the relevant facts, intuitions, and operational requirements of biology. Cladistic conceptions, however, have much in common with the older philosophical literature, in that the natural group of cladism is the clade, or monophyletic group. After considering the Individuality Thesis, and the metaphysics of species, we see that species are the most particular terminal taxa in a clade, and that they are “defined” in terms of the particular synapomorphies, or evolved characters, that are causally responsible for keeping the lineages that organisms form distinct from one another. In this way, we can remain within the generative conception of species that has been in play for over two millennia, and yet avoid the pitfalls of prior attempts to find a universal conception of species. Page ii The Origins of Species Concepts Declaration This is to certify that (i) the thesis comprises only my original work towards the PhD except where indicated in the Preface, (ii) due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used, (iii) the thesis is less than 100,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. The Origins of Species Concepts [Complex ideas] have their union and combination only from the understanding which unites them under one name: but, uniting them without any rule or pattern, it cannot be but that the signification of the name that stands for such voluntary collections should be often various in the minds of different men, who have scarce any standing rule to regulate themselves and their notions by, in such arbitrary ideas. John Locke, Essay on Human Understanding III ix 8 Dedication To my wife Paula and children Alice and John Nathaniel, who endure my obsessions with grace and resignation; and to David Hull and the late David Rindos, who both encouraged me. Page iv The Origins of Species Concepts Contents Abstract ....................................................................................................................................ii Declaration ...................................................................................................................................iii Dedication ...................................................................................................................................iv Figures ..................................................................................................................................vii Tables ..................................................................................................................................vii Preface .................................................................................................................................viii Chapter 1. Philosophy and the species problem................................................................... 1 1.1. Ideal Species Concept .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Natural and artificial...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Species realism ................................................................................................................................................ 6 1.4. Three species problems ................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4.1. Grouping problem......................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.2. The ranking problem .................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.3. The commensurability problem...............................................................................................10 Chapter 2. A philosophical history of the species concept...............................................12 2.1. Received History...........................................................................................................................................12 2.2. Universal taxonomy.....................................................................................................................................20 2.2.1. Plato................................................................................................................................................21 2.2.2. Aristotle .........................................................................................................................................23 2.2.3. Epicureanism................................................................................................................................28 2.2.4. The Hermetic tradition...............................................................................................................31 2.2.5. The neo-Platonists.......................................................................................................................31 2.3. Post-medieval period...................................................................................................................................36 2.3.1. Nicholas of Cusa ..........................................................................................................................36 2.3.2. Marsilio Ficino .............................................................................................................................38 2.4. Great Chain of Being ...................................................................................................................................39 2.5. Universal Language Project........................................................................................................................42 2.6. Death of essentialism ...................................................................................................................................45 2.6.1. Locke and Leibniz –real and nominal essence.......................................................................45 2.6.2. Immanuel Kant and the continuity of species.......................................................................48 2.6.3. Nineteenth century logic............................................................................................................51 2.7. Summary and conclusions..........................................................................................................................55 Chapter 3. Biological Taxonomy ...........................................................................................57 3.1. Beginnings......................................................................................................................................................57 3.1.1. Cesalpino and Bauhin – the beginnings .................................................................................57 3.1.2. John Ray – propagation from seed...........................................................................................59 3.1.3. Carl Linnaeus – species as the Creator made them ..............................................................61 3.1.4. Buffon – degeneration, mules, and individuals.....................................................................65 3.1.5. Charles Bonnet and the ideal morphologists.........................................................................69 3.1.6. Essentialism and natural systems .............................................................................................71
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aristotle's Essentialism Revisited
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Theses Graduate Works 4-15-2013 Accommodating Species Evolution: Aristotle’s Essentialism Revisited Yin Zhang University of Missouri-St. Louis, chinayinzhang@yahoo.com Follow this and additional works at: http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Zhang, Yin, "Accommodating Species Evolution: Aristotle’s Essentialism Revisited" (2013). Theses. 192. http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis/192 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact marvinh@umsl.edu. Accommodating Species Evolution: Aristotle’s Essentialism Revisited by Yin Zhang B.A., Philosophy, Peking University, 2010 A Thesis Submitted to The Graduate School at the University of Missouri – St. Louis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in Philosophy May 2013 Advisory Committee Jon D. McGinnis, Ph.D. Chairperson Andrew G. Black, Ph.D. Berit O. Brogaard, Ph.D. Zhang, Yin, UMSL, 2013, p. i PREFACE In the fall of 2008 when I was a junior at Peking University, I attended a lecture series directed by Dr. Melville Y. Stewart on science and religion. Guest lecturers Dr. Alvin Plantinga, Dr. William L. Craig and Dr. Bruce Reichenbach have influenced my thinking on the relation between evolution and faith. In the fall of 2010 when I became a one-year visiting student at Calvin College in Michigan, I took a seminar directed by Dr. Kelly J. Clark on evolution and ethics. Having thought about evolution/faith and evolution/ethics, I signed up for Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scientist from a Flourishing Sex-Life to Modern DNA Technology
    The Scientist From a Flourishing Sex-life to Modern DNA Technology Linnaeus the Scientist ll of a sudden you are standing there, in the bo- tanic garden that is to be Linnaeus’s base for a whole lifetime of scientific achievements. It is a beautiful spring day in Uppsala, the sun’s rays warm your heart as cheerfully as in your own 21st century. The hus- tle and bustle of the town around you break into the cen- trally located garden. Carriage wheels rattle over the cob- blestones, horses neigh, hens cackle from the house yards. The acrid smell of manure and privies bears witness to a town atmosphere very different from your own. You cast a glance at what is growing in the garden. The beds do not look particularly well kept. In fact, the whole garden gives a somewhat dilapidated impression. Suddenly, in the distance, you see a young man squat- A ting down by one of the beds. He is looking with great concentration at a small flower, examining it closely through a magnifying glass. When he lifts his head for a moment and ponders, you recognise him at once. It is Carl von Linné, or Carl Linnaeus as he was originally called. He looks very young, just over 20 years old. His pale cheeks tell you that it has been a harsh winter. His first year as a university student at Uppsala has been marked by a lack of money for both food and clothes as well as for wood to warm his rented room. 26 linnaean lessons • www.bioresurs.uu.se © 2007 Swedish Centre for School Biology and Biotechnology, Uppsala University, Sweden.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Dahlia Myths.Pub
    Cavanilles’ detailed illustrations established the dahlia in the botanical taxonomy In 1796, the third volume of “Icones” introduced two more dahlia species, named D. coccinea and D. rosea. They also were initially thought to be sunflowers and had been brought to Spain as part of the Alejandro Malaspina/Luis Neé expedition. More than 600 drawings brought the plant collection to light. Cavanilles, whose extensive correspondence included many of Europe’s leading botanists, began to develop a following far greater than his title of “sacerdote” (priest, in French Abbé) ever would have offered. The A. J. Cavanilles archives of the present‐day Royal Botanical Garden hold the botanist’s sizable oeu‐ vre, along with moren tha 1,300 letters, many dissertations, studies, and drawings. In time, Cavanilles achieved another goal: in 1801, he was finally appointed professor and director of the garden. Regrettably, he died in Madrid on May 10, 1804. The Cavanillesia, a tree from Central America, was later named for this famousMaterial Spanish scientist. ANDERS DAHL The lives of Dahl and his Spanish ‘godfather’ could not have been any more different. Born March 17,1751, in Varnhem town (Västergötland), this Swedish botanist struggled with health and financial hardship throughout his short life. While attending school in Skara, he and several teenage friends with scientific bent founded the “Swedish Topographic Society of Skara” and sought to catalogue the natural world of their community. With his preacher father’s support, the young Dahl enrolled on April 3, 1770, at Uppsala University in medicine, and he soon became one of Carl Linnaeus’ students.
    [Show full text]
  • The Taxonomy of Primates in the Laboratory Context
    P0800261_01 7/14/05 8:00 AM Page 3 C HAPTER 1 The Taxonomy of Primates T HE T in the Laboratory Context AXONOMY OF P Colin Groves RIMATES School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia 3 What are species? D Taxonomy: EFINITION OF THE The biological Organizing nature species concept Taxonomy means classifying organisms. It is nowadays commonly used as a synonym for systematics, though Disagreement as to what precisely constitutes a species P strictly speaking systematics is a much broader sphere is to be expected, given that the concept serves so many RIMATE of interest – interrelationships, and biodiversity. At the functions (Vane-Wright, 1992). We may be interested basis of taxonomy lies that much-debated concept, the in classification as such, or in the evolutionary implica- species. tions of species; in the theory of species, or in simply M ODEL Because there is so much misunderstanding about how to recognize them; or in their reproductive, phys- what a species is, it is necessary to give some space to iological, or husbandry status. discussion of the concept. The importance of what we Most non-specialists probably have some vague mean by the word “species” goes way beyond taxonomy idea that species are defined by not interbreeding with as such: it affects such diverse fields as genetics, biogeog- each other; usually, that hybrids between different species raphy, population biology, ecology, ethology, and bio- are sterile, or that they are incapable of hybridizing at diversity; in an era in which threats to the natural all. Such an impression ultimately derives from the def- world and its biodiversity are accelerating, it affects inition by Mayr (1940), whereby species are “groups of conservation strategies (Rojas, 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • Species Concepts and the Evolutionary Paradigm in Modern Nematology
    JOURNAL OF NEMATOLOGY VOLUME 30 MARCH 1998 NUMBER 1 Journal of Nematology 30 (1) :1-21. 1998. © The Society of Nematologists 1998. Species Concepts and the Evolutionary Paradigm in Modern Nematology BYRON J. ADAMS 1 Abstract: Given the task of recovering and representing evolutionary history, nematode taxonomists can choose from among several species concepts. All species concepts have theoretical and (or) opera- tional inconsistencies that can result in failure to accurately recover and represent species. This failure not only obfuscates nematode taxonomy but hinders other research programs in hematology that are dependent upon a phylogenetically correct taxonomy, such as biodiversity, biogeography, cospeciation, coevolution, and adaptation. Three types of systematic errors inherent in different species concepts and their potential effects on these research programs are presented. These errors include overestimating and underestimating the number of species (type I and II error, respectively) and misrepresenting their phylogenetic relationships (type III error). For research programs in hematology that utilize recovered evolutionary history, type II and III errors are the most serious. Linnean, biological, evolutionary, and phylogenefic species concepts are evaluated based on their sensitivity to systematic error. Linnean and biologica[ species concepts are more prone to serious systematic error than evolutionary or phylogenetic concepts. As an alternative to the current paradigm, an amalgamation of evolutionary and phylogenetic species concepts is advocated, along with a set of discovery operations designed to minimize the risk of making systematic errors. Examples of these operations are applied to species and isolates of Heterorhab- ditis. Key words: adaptation, biodiversity, biogeography, coevolufion, comparative method, cospeciation, evolution, nematode, philosophy, species concepts, systematics, taxonomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Instr Uct Or's Guide Science
    Scientists Of The Past SCIENCE Lesson Objectives • Students will compare and contrast how the rules of society restricted the progress of science in the past. • Students will list several famous scientists from history. Activities Checklist In this lesson, the student will • Watch the instructional video about how the rules of society restricted the progress of science in the past and the scientists who, over time, were able to break away from these restrictions • Interact with My Book and learn about how the rules of society restricted the progress of science in the past • Complete the crossword puzzle, in the Science Activities Workbook, by determining the scientist who made each cited discovery • Complete all learning activities assessing understanding of the sequence of scientifi c events and discoveries Video Summary Students are given a modern-day scenario of reading something aloud in front of the classroom to better understand the stress scientists felt during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, when they were presenting new scientifi c theories to society. Scientists of the past were not always respected. Sometimes publicly voicing their scientifi c opinions could result in jail, exile, or even death. Religion determined what could or could not be accepted as explanations and discoveries. When a scientist would come up with a new explanation for why something occurred in nature, he or she would often have to argue the claim against the church -- and the church always won. After many, many years, the scientifi c community was able to break away from the church, resulting in numerous scientifi c endeavors. Some of the most famous scientists include Anton van Leeuwenhoek (improved the microscope), Carl Linnaeus (developed the classifi cation of life on Earth), Charles Darwin (developed the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection), and Albert Einstein (worked within mathematics, GUIDE INSTRUCTOR’S physics, and astronomy).
    [Show full text]
  • Linnaeus at Home
    NATURE-BASED ACTIVITIES FOR PARENTS LINNAEUS 1 AT HOME A GuiDE TO EXPLORING NATURE WITH CHILDREN Acknowledgements Written by Joe Burton Inspired by Carl Linnaeus With thanks to editors and reviewers: LINNAEUS Lyn Baber, Melissa Balzano, Jane Banham, Sarah Black, Isabelle Charmantier, Mark Chase, Maarten Christenhusz, Alex Davey, Gareth Dauley, AT HOME Zia Forrai, Jon Hale, Simon Hiscock, Alice ter Meulen, Lynn Parker, Elizabeth Rollinson, James Rosindell, Daryl Stenvoll-Wells, Ross Ziegelmeier Share your explorations @LinneanLearning #LinnaeusAtHome Facing page: Carl Linnaeus paper doll, illustrated in 1953. © Linnean Society of London 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrival system or trasmitted in any form or by any means without the prior consent of the copyright owner. www.linnean.org/learning “If you do not know Introduction the names of things, the knowledge of them is Who was Carl Linnaeus? Contents Pitfall traps 5 lost too” Carl Linnaeus was one of the most influential scientists in the world, - Carl Linnaeus A bust of ‘The Young Linnaeus’ by but you might not know a lot about him. Thanks to Linnaeus, we Bug hunting 9 Anthony Smith (2007). have a naming system for all species so that we can understand how different species are related and can start to learn about the origins Plant hunting 13 of life on Earth. Pond dipping 17 As a young man, Linnaeus would study the animals, plants, Bird feeders 21 minerals and habitats around him. By watching the natural world, he began to understand that all living things are adapted to their Squirrel feeders 25 environments and that they can be grouped together by their characteristics (like animals with backbones, or plants that produce Friendly spaces 29 spores).
    [Show full text]
  • Diagnosis and Differentiation of the Order Primates
    YEARBOOK OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 30:75-105 (1987) Diagnosis and Differentiation of the Order Primates FREDERICK S. SZALAY, ALFRED L. ROSENBERGER, AND MARIAN DAGOSTO Department of Anthropolog* Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, New York 10021 (F.S.S.); University of Illinois, Urbanq Illinois 61801 (A.L. R.1; School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University/ Baltimore, h4D 21218 (M.B.) KEY WORDS Semiorders Paromomyiformes and Euprimates, Suborders Strepsirhini and Haplorhini, Semisuborder Anthropoidea, Cranioskeletal morphology, Adapidae, Omomyidae, Grades vs. monophyletic (paraphyletic or holophyletic) taxa ABSTRACT We contrast our approach to a phylogenetic diagnosis of the order Primates, and its various supraspecific taxa, with definitional proce- dures. The order, which we divide into the semiorders Paromomyiformes and Euprimates, is clearly diagnosable on the basis of well-corroborated informa- tion from the fossil record. Lists of derived features which we hypothesize to have been fixed in the first representative species of the Primates, Eupri- mates, Strepsirhini, Haplorhini, and Anthropoidea, are presented. Our clas- sification of the order includes both holophyletic and paraphyletic groups, depending on the nature of the available evidence. We discuss in detail the problematic evidence of the basicranium in Paleo- gene primates and present new evidence for the resolution of previously controversial interpretations. We renew and expand our emphasis on postcra- nial analysis of fossil and living primates to show the importance of under- standing their evolutionary morphology and subsequent to this their use for understanding taxon phylogeny. We reject the much advocated %ladograms first, phylogeny next, and scenario third” approach which maintains that biologically founded character analysis, i.e., functional-adaptive analysis and paleontology, is irrelevant to genealogy hypotheses.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revised Taxonomy of the Iguanodont Dinosaur Genera and Species
    ARTICLE IN PRESS + MODEL Cretaceous Research xx (2007) 1e25 www.elsevier.com/locate/CretRes A revised taxonomy of the iguanodont dinosaur genera and species Gregory S. Paul 3109 North Calvert Station, Side Apartment, Baltimore, MD 21218-3807, USA Received 20 April 2006; accepted in revised form 27 April 2007 Abstract Criteria for designating dinosaur genera are inconsistent; some very similar species are highly split at the generic level, other anatomically disparate species are united at the same rank. Since the mid-1800s the classic genus Iguanodon has become a taxonomic grab-bag containing species spanning most of the Early Cretaceous of the northern hemisphere. Recently the genus was radically redesignated when the type was shifted from nondiagnostic English Valanginian teeth to a complete skull and skeleton of the heavily built, semi-quadrupedal I. bernissartensis from much younger Belgian sediments, even though the latter is very different in form from the gracile skeletal remains described by Mantell. Currently, iguanodont remains from Europe are usually assigned to either robust I. bernissartensis or gracile I. atherfieldensis, regardless of lo- cation or stage. A stratigraphic analysis is combined with a character census that shows the European iguanodonts are markedly more morpho- logically divergent than other dinosaur genera, and some appear phylogenetically more derived than others. Two new genera and a new species have been or are named for the gracile iguanodonts of the Wealden Supergroup; strongly bipedal Mantellisaurus atherfieldensis Paul (2006. Turning the old into the new: a separate genus for the gracile iguanodont from the Wealden of England. In: Carpenter, K. (Ed.), Horns and Beaks: Ceratopsian and Ornithopod Dinosaurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Criteria Used in IUCN Assessment Overestimate Area of Occupancy for Freshwater Taxa
    Spatial Criteria Used in IUCN Assessment Overestimate Area of Occupancy for Freshwater Taxa By Jun Cheng A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto © Copyright Jun Cheng 2013 Spatial Criteria Used in IUCN Assessment Overestimate Area of Occupancy for Freshwater Taxa Jun Cheng Masters of Science Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto 2013 Abstract Area of Occupancy (AO) is a frequently used indicator to assess and inform designation of conservation status to wildlife species by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The applicability of the current grid-based AO measurement on freshwater organisms has been questioned due to the restricted dimensionality of freshwater habitats. I investigated the extent to which AO influenced conservation status for freshwater taxa at a national level in Canada. I then used distribution data of 20 imperiled freshwater fish species of southwestern Ontario to (1) demonstrate biases produced by grid-based AO and (2) develop a biologically relevant AO index. My results showed grid-based AOs were sensitive to spatial scale, grid cell positioning, and number of records, and were subject to inconsistent decision making. Use of the biologically relevant AO changed conservation status for four freshwater fish species and may have important implications on the subsequent conservation practices. ii Acknowledgments I would like to thank many people who have supported and helped me with the production of this Master’s thesis. First is to my supervisor, Dr. Donald Jackson, who was the person that inspired me to study aquatic ecology and conservation biology in the first place, despite my background in environmental toxicology.
    [Show full text]
  • Writings of Charles De Koninck, Volume
    D E K O N I N The Writings C K of ልሎ CHARLES C H DE KONINCK A R T L h E e S W D r i E t i n K g O s o N f I N C K ልሎ Edited and Translated by Ralph McInerny The Writings of CHARLES DE KONINCK Charles De Koninck, University of Laval, Quebec. The Writings of CHARLES DE KONINCK volume one Edited and Translated by Ralph McInerny with a biography by Thomas De Koninck andልሎ an introduction by Leslie Armour University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana DeKoninck-000.FM 4/15/08 1:17 PM Page iv Copyright © by University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana www.undpress.nd.edu All Rights Reserved Manufactured in the United States of America Designed by Wendy McMillen Set in ./. Minion by Four Star Books Printed on # Nature’s Recycle paper by Sheridan Books, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Koninck, Charles de, d. [Works. English. ] The writings of Charles De Koninck / edited and translated by Ralph McInerny ; with a biography by Thomas De Koninck ; and an introduction by Leslie Armour. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. -: ---- (cloth : alk. paper) -: --- (cloth : alk. paper) . Koninck, Charles de, d. Science—Philosophy. I. McInerny, Ralph M. II. Title. '.—dc This book is printed on recycled paper. Contents Preface vii The Philosophy of Charles De Koninck 1 Leslie Armour Charles De Koninck: A Biographical Sketch 69 Thomas De Koninck ልሎ Works by Charles De Koninck The Philosophy of Sir Arthur Eddington (1934) 99 The Cosmos (1936) 235 The Problem of Indeterminism (1935) 355 Reflections on the Problem of Indeterminism (1937) 401 Are the Experimental Sciences Distinct from the Philosophy of Nature? (1941) 443 Index 457 Preface A few years ago, David Quackenbush, a tutor at Thomas Aquinas College in California, conceived the idea of photocopying the Charles De Koninck ar- chives at the University of Laval.
    [Show full text]
  • Detecting Patterns of Species Diversification in the Presence of Both Rate Shifts and Mass Extinctions
    Version dated: August 3, 2021 Detecting patterns of species diversification in the presence of both rate shifts and mass extinctions Sacha Laurent12, Marc Robinson-Rechavi12, and Nicolas Salamin12 1Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland 2Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Quartier Sorge, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland (Keywords: Phylogeny, Diversification, Mass Extinctions) Abstract Background: Recent methodological advances allow better examination of speciation and extinction processes and patterns. A major open question is the origin of large discrepancies in species number between groups of the same age. Existing frameworks to model this diversity either focus on changes between lineages, neglecting global effects such as mass arXiv:1404.5441v3 [q-bio.PE] 31 Aug 2015 extinctions, or focus on changes over time which would affect all lineages. Yet it seems probable that both lineages differences and mass extinctions affect the same groups. Results: Here we used simulations to test the performance of two widely used methods under complex scenarios of diversification. We report good performances, although with a tendency to over-predict events with increasing complexity of the scenario. Conclusion: Overall, we find that lineage shifts are better detected than mass extinctions. This work has significance to assess the methods currently used to estimate changes in diversification using phylogenetic trees. Our results also point toward the need to develop new models of diversification to expand our capabilities to analyse realistic and complex evolutionary scenarios. Background The estimation of the rates of speciation and extinction provides important information on the macro-evolutionary processes shaping biodiversity through time (Ricklefs 2007). Since the seminal paper by Nee et al: Nee et al.
    [Show full text]