DOCSLIB.ORG

Systems of Systematics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Systems of Systematics Biological Classification What’s in a name? Biological Classification “Bears” • Taxonomy: naming & classifying organisms • Systematics: studying relationships among taxonomic groups North America Australia Systems of I. Anthrocentric Systems • “human-centered” — Classified based on their Systematics relevance or usefulness to humans I. Anthrocentric – Edible / inedible / medicinal – Wild vs. domestic II. Ecological – Crops vs. weeds • Still basis for political policies – “Biological resources” III. Hierarchical – Commercially harvested vs. recreationally harvested vs. non-targeted (trash, by-catch) IV. Phylogenetic species I. Anthrocentric Systems II. Ecological Systems • Classified based on their habitat, niche or behavior Aristotle, 384–322 BCE – “Plant” (planted in place / sessile) – Scalae Naturae (“ladder of nature”) vs. “Animal” (animated / motile) – “beasts of the field” / “beasts of the air” / • “advanced” = more human-like “beasts of the sea” (fish) • “primitive” = less human-like • Useful for studying ecological relationships and effects of environment on body forms * Archaic, prejudicial expressions: – Vegetation types: herb / shrub / tree Any organism successfully surviving is not – Aquatic life: plankton / nekton / benthos “primitive”! – Assemblages of organisms in a specific * Better terms: “generalized” vs. “specialized” community or “derived” • Oak woodland biota; coral reef biota; etc. Heyer 1 Biological Classification Carolus Linnaeus (Carl von Linné), 1707–1778 III. Hierarchical Systems —“Father of modern taxonomy & systematics” • Classified based on their relative similarities • Swedish botanist, zoologist, physician, linguist, poet, & educator. Degree in of body form Medicine; professor of medicine & Carolus Linnaeus (Carl von Linné), 1707–1778 botany - Uppsala University. • Also one of the fathers of modern —“Father of modern taxonomy & systematics” ecology. One of the most influential intellectuals of the 18th century. • Students from all over Europe (esp. England) came to study under him. Then went out to join numerous exploratory expeditions around the world (e.g., with James Cook) and join faculties of major universities. • Linnaeus also corresponded with Carl von Linné, 1775 collectors and naturalists around the world who sent him exotic specimens. III. Hierarchical Systems Taxonomy & Linnaean Hierarchy • Classified based on their relative similarities • Levels called taxa (sing., taxon: “classification”) of body form – The more similar two organisms are, the more levels “ they have in common K “K ing Carolus Linnaeus (Carl von Linné), 1707–1778 ings P a) hilip —“Father of modern taxonomy & systematics” Kingdom P lay i. Recognize “patterns in creation” b) Phylum (Division)* C C ame hess • Develop a standard hierarchy of similarities c) Class O O ver ii. “…finish the work of Adam.” d) Order n F F ine or e) Family* • Identify, name, and categorize all forms of life G G ood on earth. f) Genus reen S oup • Develop a standard “universal” naming practice g) Species S and ” (“scientific name”) *not in the original Linnaean hierarchy Carl Linné,” 1737 Taxonomy & Linnaean Hierarchy Biological Kingdoms • For taxa with high diversity and large number of species, Classification of Life on Earth (esp., arthropods) additional levels may be added by using • Classical two-kingdom model prefixes super-, sub-, or infra- – Plants • E.g., – Animals d) Order Worked well for macroscopic terrestrial life. But became inadequate once microbial and oceanic ecosystems were explored e) Family • Expanded five-kingdom model (Whittaker 1960s) • may be expanded to Cells are the basic unit of life, d) Order so define types of life by the types of their cells – Monera d’) Suborder – Protista d”) Infraorder – Fungi d”’) Superfamily – Plantae – Animalia e) Family Heyer 2 Biological Classification Linnaean Taxonomy Linnaean Taxonomy Some rules: Some rules: Since all scientific and academic work in Linnaeus’ time • Names of families always end in “-idae” [animals] was conducted in Latin or Greek, or “-aceae” [plants & fungi] • all taxonomic names are written in Latin or Greek … – Hominidae – rosa: “rose” – Canidae – homo: “human” – Rosacea – canis: “dog” – porifera: “pore bearing” • Names of genera must be unique – brevispinus: “short-spined” I.e., not given to any other genus – Homo • … or in Latinized/Hellenized derivations of proper – Canis names – Rosa – ricketsia: [in honor of Ed] Rickets – californicus: [discovered in] California • A species is a group of organisms similar enough to interbreed Linnaean Taxonomy Classification of some edible shellfish The universal “scientific name” for a species: American Lobster Market Squid Blue Mussel Virginia Oyster European Oyster • Binomial nomenclature (“two-name naming”) The universal name for a species is its Kingdom Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia generic name with a specific epithet, Phylum Arthropoda Mollusca Mollusca Mollusca Mollusca i.e., its genus + species names Class Malacostraca Cephalopoda Bivalvia Bivalvia Bivalvia – Homo sapiens – Canis familiaris Order Decapoda Decapoda Mytiloida Pterioida Pterioida • The two names must be unique to one species. Family Nephropidae Loliginidae Mytilidae Ostreidae Ostreidae • The genus name must be capitalized; the species name all Genus Homarus Loligo Mytilus Crassostrea Ostrea lower case — even if it’s in a title. Species americanus opalescens edulis virginica edulis • The scientific name is always printed (type-set; word processed) in italics. If handwritten, it must be underlined. Note: some names are duplicated for taxa other than genus! • The species name must include the genus. – Homo sapiens or H. sapiens, but never just sapiens Linnaean Taxonomy “The Linnaean Enterprise” The Law of Priority: • Identify, name, and categorize all forms • If more than one name has been assigned to organisms later decided to be all one species, the first published name of life on earth. becomes the name for the combined group. • Systema Naturae • The specimen originally used to the describe the newly – 1735 (first edition) named species is the type specimen. – The type specimen is carefully archived in a certified museum – By 1758 (tenth ed.) collection available for subsequent studies. • Included 4400 animal spp. • If a group of organisms originally classified as a single & 7700 plant spp. species becomes divided into multiple species, the original • First consistent use of scientific name belongs to the new group that includes the type species. binomial nomenclature 1760 edition Heyer 3 Biological Classification “The Linnaean Enterprise” IV. Phylogenetic Systems • Still lots to do! • Classified based on presumed common ancestry • Usually still use Linnaean hierarchy, but now more • Present — ~1.8 million species named levels in common suggests a more recent (~70% of them are insects) divergence from a common ancestor. • But since we don’t actually know the ancestry above the level of genus or maybe family, still dependent upon degrees of similarity. – Comparative morphology & anatomy Only ~ 1% studied Estimated – Comparative embryology significantly ~10 million spp. – Comparative biochemistry — proteins & DNA • Much disagreement may be debated regarding yet to be named which similarities and which differences are most phylogenetically significant! IV. Phylogenetic Systems 1. Classical phylogenetics 1. Classical (authoritative) phylogenetics • “Traditional evolutionary taxonomy” (TET) 2. Phenetics • Authoritative — Influential “experts” on each 3. Cladistics taxon pick which characters are most significant 4. Synthetic systematics – Create “trees” (dendrograms) – Try to incorporate bits of all of the above – Often arbitrary and contradictory – Certain popular trees get perpetuated when published in textbooks A phylogenetic “tree” 2. Phenetics • Morphometrics — carefully measure all • Aristotle’s dimensions of body form philosophy in • Phenogram (taxonomic cluster) — mathematic a Darwinian programs calculate degrees of similarity (cluster analysis — advent of available computers) context • TET purists argue that all body forms are not dependent upon ancestry, \ should not be included – Homology vs. analogy • Pheneticists counter that since no one actually knows ancestry, at least metric methods are less arbitrary than TET. Heyer 4 Biological Classification Problem: Divergence vs. Convergence — Homology vs. Analogy 3. Cladistics • Traditional phylogeneticists get to have computer programs too! Similarity due to • Clade (“branch”) — replace traditional taxon convergence is analogy. – Groups of organisms presumed to be derived from a common ancestor are organized by (Similar bifurcating (two-way splitting) of a branch adaptations to – Each bifurcation is based upon the acquisition similar environments; of a new, unique character (apomorphy). not shared ancestry.) • Maximum parsimony: the branch pattern that can be created with the fewest required steps is most likely the most correct. 3. Cladistics Building Cladograms Assemble a table of character states More vocabulary: Major assumptions: • A true clade must be monophyletic 1. The group of organisms is – must include an ancestor and all of the known monophyletic descendants of that ancestor. 2. The outgroup (used for – A grouping that only includes an ancestor and some of comparison) is closely related to, its descendants is paraphyletic. but separate from your group – A grouping that includes organisms from different ancestries is polyphyletic. 3. You can tell which character states are
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plant Classification, Evolution and Reproduction
    Plant Classification, Evolution, and Reproduction Plant classification, evolution and reproduction! Traditional plant classification! ! A phylogenetic perspective on classification! ! Milestones of land plant evolution! ! Overview of land plant diversity! ! Life cycle of land plants! Classification “the ordering of diversity into a meaningful hierarchical pattern” (i.e., grouping)! The Taxonomic Hierarchy! Classification of Ayahuasca, Banisteriopsis caapi! Kingdom !Plantae! Phylum !Magnoliophyta Class ! !Magnoliopsida! Order !Malpighiales! Family !Malpighiaceae Genus ! !Banisteriopsis! Species !caapi! Ranks above genus have standard endings.! Higher categories are more inclusive.! Botanical nomenclature Carolus Linnaeus (1707–1778)! Species Plantarum! published 1753! 7,300 species! Botanical nomenclature Polynomials versus binomials! Know the organism “The Molesting Salvinia” Salvinia auriculata (S. molesta)! hp://dnr.state.il.us/stewardship/cd/biocontrol/2floangfern.html " Taxonomy vs. classification! Assigning a name! A system ! ! ! Placement in a category! Often predictive ! because it is based on Replicable, reliable relationships! results! ! Relationships centered on genealogy ! ! ! ! Edward Hitchcock, Elementary Geology, 1940! Classification Phylogeny: Reflect hypothesized evolution. relationships! Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, 1859! Ernst Haeckel, Generelle Morphologie der Organismen, 1866! Branching tree-like diagrams representing relationships! Magnolia 1me 2 Zi m merman (1930) Lineage branching (cladogenesis or speciation) Modified
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 9 BIOL 325 – Plant Systematics Name
    BIOL 325 – Plant Systematics Name: ___________________________ Sample Topics & Questions for Exam 1 This document and questions are the copyright of CRHardy, 2016 onwards. Topic 01 – Introduction, Sample Topics & Questions: 1. What major topics to Rhoads and Block (2007) discuss in the introduction to their book? 2. What are the reasons that Prather et al. (2004) list for continued herbarium collecting even in places like North America the flora is thought to be well known? 3. What method(s) does Dirig (2005) discuss for mounting pressed specimens to herbarium sheets? 4. What methods does Dirig (2005) discuss for collecting plant specimens for later pressing? 5. What do the graphs used by Prather et al. (2004) show about herbarium plant collecting in the US? 6. How does one define plant systematics? Name at least one synonym for plant systematics? 7. What are practitioners of plant systematics called and what are some of their important products? 8. Be able to explain how each of these products are important to people and other scientists outside the field of systematics. 9. What is a phylogeny? 10. What is a herbarium? 11. Name the important components of a herbarium specimen. 12. What are herbarium specimens used for? 13. Although taxonomy and systematics are often treated as synonyms by many, they are not actually the same thing. Which of the two is a broader term and how so? 14. The far majority of plant species are described from studies in ... a. botanical gardens b. herbaria c. the field d. plant nurseries e. zoological museums Page 1 of 9 15.
    [Show full text]
  • Learn About Plant Diversity, with Focus on the Angiosperm Flora of Washington State
    Biol 317: Plant Classification & Identification Spring 2014 Instructor: Dr. Pat Lu-Irving Office: 408 Hitchcock Office hours: Tue & Wed, 10-11am (or by appointment) Email: [email protected] Grad TA: John Chau Peer TAs: Adrienne Cohen Sam Frankel Kate Nowell Veanna Willard Class website: http://courses.washington.edu/bot113/ Course objectives Learn about plant diversity, with focus on the angiosperm flora of Washington state. Most land plants are flowering plants Incl. grasses, roses, lilies, daisies; producing both flowers and fruits WA natives There are approximately 300,000 species of angiosperms, with 3,000 occurring in WA Compare with mammals: only 5,500 on Earth Course objectives Understand the principles and philosophy of plant classification. In modern classification, our goal is to recognize monophyletic groups Monocots Eudicots Knowledge of phylogeny is vital to plant classification Course objectives Identify 40 important plant families by sight. Key unknown plants to species using published floras. Orchidaceae Araceae Knowledge of morphology is vital to plant identification sepal corolla Corallorhiza maculata Lysichiton americanus stem Ericaceae Boraginaceae stamen leaf ovary Elliottia pyroliflora Myosotis sylvatica Course objectives Gain a greater appreciation for nature, and your connection Triticum aestivum with it. Hevea brasiliensis Wheat flour Natural rubber Coffea arabica Erythroxylum coca Coffee Course objectives Gain a greater appreciation for nature, and your connection with it. Today’s lecture Nomenclature and classification
    [Show full text]
  • The Exotic World of Carolus Clusius 1526-1609 and a Reconstruction of the Clusius Garden
    The Netherlandish humanist Carolus Clusius (Arras 1526- Leiden 1609) is one of the most important European the exotic botanists of the sixteenth century. He is the author of innovative, internationally famous botanical publications, the exotic worldof he introduced exotic plants such as the tulip and potato world of in the Low Countries, and he was advisor of princes and aristocrats in various European countries, professor and director of the Hortus botanicus in Leiden, and central figure in a vast European network of exchanges. Carolus On 4 April 2009 Leiden University, Leiden University Library, The Hortus botanicus and the Scaliger Institute 1526-1609 commemorate the quatercentenary of Clusius’ death with an exhibition The Exotic World of Carolus Clusius 1526-1609 and a reconstruction of the Clusius Garden. Clusius carolus clusius scaliger instituut clusius all3.indd 1 16-03-2009 10:38:21 binnenwerk.qxp 16-3-2009 11:11 Pagina 1 Kleine publicaties van de Leidse Universiteitsbibliotheek Nr. 80 binnenwerk.qxp 16-3-2009 11:12 Pagina 2 binnenwerk.qxp 16-3-2009 11:12 Pagina 3 The Exotic World of Carolus Clusius (1526-1609) Catalogue of an exhibition on the quatercentenary of Clusius’ death, 4 April 2009 Edited by Kasper van Ommen With an introductory essay by Florike Egmond LEIDEN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY LEIDEN 2009 binnenwerk.qxp 16-3-2009 11:12 Pagina 4 ISSN 0921-9293, volume 80 This publication was made possible through generous grants from the Clusiusstichting, Clusius Project, Hortus botanicus and The Scaliger Institute, Leiden. Web version: https://disc.leidenuniv.nl/view/exh.jsp?id=exhubl002 Cover: Jacob de Monte (attributed), Portrait of Carolus Clusius at the age of 59.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Te Reo Māori and Ta Re Moriori in Taxonomy
    VealeNew Zealand et al.: Te Journal reo Ma- oriof Ecologyin taxonomy (2019) 43(3): 3388 © 2019 New Zealand Ecological Society. 1 REVIEW Using te reo Māori and ta re Moriori in taxonomy Andrew J. Veale1,2* , Peter de Lange1 , Thomas R. Buckley2,3 , Mana Cracknell4, Holden Hohaia2, Katharina Parry5 , Kamera Raharaha-Nehemia6, Kiri Reihana2 , Dave Seldon2,3 , Katarina Tawiri2 and Leilani Walker7 1Unitec Institute of Technology, 139 Carrington Road, Mt Albert, Auckland 1025, New Zealand 2Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 231 Morrin Road, St Johns, Auckland 1072, New Zealand 3School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, 3A Symonds St, Auckland CBD, Auckland 1010, New Zealand 4Rongomaiwhenua-Moriori, Kaiangaroa, Chatham Island, New Zealand 5Massey University, Private Bag 11222 Palmerston North, 4442, New Zealand 6Ngāti Kuri, Otaipango, Ngataki, Te Aupouri, Northland, New Zealand 7Auckland University of Technology, 55 Wellesley St E, Auckland CBS, Auckland 1010, New Zealand *Author for correspondence (Email: [email protected]) Published online: 28 November 2019 Auheke: Ko ngā ingoa Linnaean ka noho hei pou mō te pārongo e pā ana ki ngā momo koiora. He mea nui rawa kia mārama, kia ahurei hoki ngā ingoa pūnaha whakarōpū. Me pēnei kia taea ai te whakawhitiwhiti kōrero ā-pūtaiao nei. Nā tēnā kua āta whakatakotohia ētahi ture, tohu ārahi hoki hei whakahaere i ngā whakamārama pūnaha whakarōpū. Kua whakamanahia ēnei kia noho hei tikanga mō te ao pūnaha whakarōpū. Heoi, arā noa atu ngā hua o te tukanga waihanga ingoa Linnaean mō ngā momo koiora i tua atu i te tautohu noa i ngā momo koiora. Ko tētahi o aua hua ko te whakarau: (1) i te mātauranga o ngā iwi takatake, (2) i te kōrero rānei mai i te iwi o te rohe, (3) i ngā kōrero pūrākau rānei mō te wāhi whenua.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Mammals Are Called Mammals: Gender Politics in Eighteenth-Century Natural History Author(S): Londa Schiebinger Source: the American Historical Review, Vol
    Why Mammals are Called Mammals: Gender Politics in Eighteenth-Century Natural History Author(s): Londa Schiebinger Source: The American Historical Review, Vol. 98, No. 2 (Apr., 1993), pp. 382-411 Published by: American Historical Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2166840 Accessed: 22/01/2010 10:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aha. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Historical Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review. http://www.jstor.org Why Mammals Are Called Mammals: Gender Politics in Eighteenth-Century Natural History LONDA SCHIEBINGER IN 1758, IN THE TENTH EDITION OF HIS Systema naturae, Carolus Linnaeus introduced the term Mammaliainto zoological taxonomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Identification Presentation
    Today’s Agenda ◦ History of Plant Taxonomy ◦ Plant Classification ◦ Scientific Names ◦ Leaf and Flower Characteristics ◦ Dichotomous Keys Plant Identification Heather Stoven What do you gain Looking at plants more closely from identifying plants? Why is it ◦ How do plants relate to each other? How are they important? grouped? • Common disease and insect problems • Cultural requirements • Plant habit • Propagation methods • Use for food and medicine Plant Classification Plant Classification Group each plant into a specific category Group each plant into a specific category Maple Spiraea Viburnum Crabapple Maple Spiraea Apple tree Ash Viburnum Crabapple Daylily Geranium Apple tree Ash Tomato Poinsettia Daylily Geranium TREES Oak Pepper Tomato Poinsettia Weeping willow Mint Oak Pepper Petunia Euonymus Weeping willow Mint Petunia Euonymus OS-Plant ID.ppt, page 1 Plant Classification Plant Classification Group each plant into a specific category Group each plant into a specific category Maple Spiraea Maple Spiraea Viburnum Crabapple Viburnum Crabapple Apple tree Ash Ornamental Apple tree Ash Edible Daylily Geranium Flowering Daylily Geranium Tomato Poinsettia Plants Tomato Poinsettia Crops Oak Pepper Oak Pepper Weeping willow Mint Weeping willow Mint Petunia Euonymus Petunia Euonymus Carolus Linnaeus Plant Taxonomy The Father of Taxonomy ◦ Identifying, classifying and assigning ◦ Swedish botanist scientific names to plants ◦ Developed binomial ◦ Historical botanists trace the start of nomenclature taxonomy to one of Aristotle’s students, Theophrastus (372-287 B.C.), but he didn’t ◦ Cataloged plants based on create a scientific system natural relationships—primarily flower structures (male and ◦ He relied on the common groupings of female sexual organs) folklore combined with growth: tree, shrub, undershrub or herb ◦ Published Species Naturae in ◦ Detected the process of germination and 1735 and Species Plantarum in realized the importance of climate and soil 1753 to plants ◦ Then, along came Linnaeus….
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plants of the Washington - Baltimore Area
    Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plants of the Washington - Baltimore Area Part II Monocotyledons Stanwyn G. Shetler Sylvia Stone Orli Botany Section, Department of Systematic Biology National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560-0166 MAP OF THE CHECKLIST AREA Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plants of the Washington - Baltimore Area Part II Monocotyledons by Stanwyn G. Shetler and Sylvia Stone Orli Department of Systematic Biology Botany Section National Museum of Natural History 2002 Botany Section, Department of Systematic Biology National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560-0166 Cover illustration of Canada or nodding wild rye (Elymus canadensis L.) from Manual of the Grasses of the United States by A. S. Hitchcock, revised by Agnes Chase (1951). iii PREFACE The first part of our Annotated Checklist, covering the 2001 species of Ferns, Fern Allies, Gymnosperms, and Dicotyledons native or naturalized in the Washington-Baltimore Area, was published in March 2000. Part II covers the Monocotyledons and completes the preliminary edition of the Checklist, which we hope will prove useful not only in itself but also as a first step toward a new manual for the identification of the Area’s flora. Such a manual is needed to replace the long- outdated and out-of-print Flora of the District of Columbia and Vicinity of Hitchcock and Standley, published in 1919. In the preparation of this part, as with Part I, Shetler has been responsible for the taxonomy and nomenclature and Orli for the database. As with the first part, we are distributing this second part in preliminary form, so that it can be used, criticized, and updated while the two parts are being readied for publication as a single volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation Ch 2
    Disenchantment and Re-enchantment: Rhetorical Tension in the Siècle des Lumières A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Sean P. Killackey IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Daniel Brewer DECEMBER 2020 © Sean P. Killackey, 2020 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank the members of my committee, without whom none of this project would have seen the light of day. I am deeply grateful to Dan Brewer, Juliette Cherbuliez, Mary Franklin-Brown, and Michael Gaudio for their commitment and perseverance in seeing this dissertation project through to its completion. Before this dissertation even took shape, their courses and scholarship inspired new avenues of intellectual pursuit for me. I am particularly grateful for the many conversations at workshops, in offices and hallways, and after myriad speaker events with each of them during the development of ideas that would eventually coalesce into a dissertation project. I would like to express my deep and enduring gratitude to my advisor, Daniel Brewer, who read countless revisions with patience and tirelessly gave diplomatic and insightful feedback, challenging my assumptions and posing questions that lead me to more fruitful exploration and stronger writing. His intellectual guidance for this project over the long duration is a testament to his perseverance and his passion for critical inquiry into the literature and culture of the eighteenth century. I sincerely thank Juliette Cherbuliez for chairing my committee and for her advice on the importance of working with people who “ask great questions.” Her brilliant and challenging questions impacted my thinking on this project, perhaps more than she even knows.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of Arts and Architecture PLANTAE, ANIMALIA, FUNGI: TRANSFORMATIONS OF NATURAL HISTORY IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN ART A Dissertation in Art History by Alissa Walls Mazow © 2009 Alissa Walls Mazow Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2009 The Dissertation of Alissa Walls Mazow was reviewed and approved* by the following: Sarah K. Rich Associate Professor of Art History Dissertation Adviser Chair of Committee Brian A. Curran Associate Professor of Art History Richard M. Doyle Professor of English, Science, Technology and Society, and Information Science and Technology Nancy Locke Associate Professor of Art History Craig Zabel Associate Professor of Art History Head of the Department of Art History *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. ii Abstract This dissertation examines the ways that five contemporary artists—Mark Dion (b. 1961), Fred Tomaselli (b. 1956), Walton Ford (b. 1960), Roxy Paine (b. 1966) and Cy Twombly (b. 1928)—have adopted the visual traditions and theoretical formulations of historical natural history to explore longstanding relationships between “nature” and “culture” and begin new dialogues about emerging paradigms, wherein plants, animals and fungi engage in ecologically-conscious dialogues. Using motifs such as curiosity cabinets and systems of taxonomy, these artists demonstrate a growing interest in the paradigms of natural history. For these practitioners natural history operates within the realm of history, memory and mythology, inspiring them to make works that examine a scientific paradigm long thought to be obsolete. This study, which itself takes on the form of a curiosity cabinet, identifies three points of consonance among these artists.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of Wisconsin Rosids
    Diversity of Wisconsin Rosids . mustards, mallows, maples . **Brassicaceae - mustard family Large, complex family of mustard oil producing species (broccoli, brussel sprouts, cauliflower, kale, cabbage) **Brassicaceae - mustard family CA 4 CO 4 A 4+2 G (2) • Flowers “cross-like” with 4 petals - “Cruciferae” or “cross-bearing” •Common name is “cress” • 6 stamens with 2 outer ones shorter Cardamine concatenata - cut leaf toothwort Wisconsin has 28 native or introduced genera - many are spring flowering Herbs with alternate, often dissected leaves Cardamine pratensis - cuckoo flower **Brassicaceae - mustard family CA 4 CO 4 A 4+2 G (2) • 2 fused carpels separated by thin membrane – septum • Capsule that peels off the two outer carpel walls exposing the septum attached to the persistent replum **Brassicaceae - mustard family CA 4 CO 4 A 4+2 G (2) siliques silicles Fruits are called siliques or silicles based on how the fruit is flattened relative to the septum **Brassicaceae - mustard family Cardamine concatenata - cut leaf toothwort Common spring flowering woodland herbs Cardamine douglasii - purple spring cress **Brassicaceae - mustard family Arabidopsis lyrata - rock or sand cress (old Arabis) Common spring flowering woodland herbs Boechera laevigata - smooth rock cress (old Arabis) **Brassicaceae - mustard family Nasturtium officinale - water cress edible aquatic native with a mustard zing **Brassicaceae - mustard family Introduced or spreading Hesperis matronalis - Dame’s Barbarea vulgaris - yellow rocket rocket, winter cress **Brassicaceae
    [Show full text]
  • Carolus Linnaeus' System for Classifying Organisms
    Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms Unit 3 Lesson 2 Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms Students will be able to: • Outline the main taxonomic groups and classification of selected organisms. • State the conventions for naming a species using binomial nomenclature. Key Vocabulary: Binomial name/nomenclature, Class, Classification, Common name, Domain, Family, Genus, Kingdom, Life process, Order, Phylum, Species, Taxonomy, Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms Classification • Classification categorizes organisms into smaller groups. • In the same way that the books in a library are sorted according to their respective topics, science also has a way of categorizing the 1.5 million species that have been discovered so far. Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms The Importance of Classification All living organisms are made up of cells and demonstrate each of the seven key life processes below: • movement • respiration These 7 life processes can be • sensitivity remembered using • growth the acronym: • reproduction MRS GREN • excretion • nutrition Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms The Importance of Classification: • uses a hierarchy of levels based on the degree of similarity between species and how they carry out their life processes. • makes studying populations of organisms easier as they have many shared features. • newly identified can be placed into an appropriate group by observing how they carry out each life process. Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms Comprehension Check: Can you... 1. List the 7 life processes used to classify organisms? 2. Explain why organisms need to be sorted? Carolus Linnaeus’ System for Classifying Organisms Comprehension Check: Answers Can you... 1. List the 7 life processes used to classify organisms? Movement, Respiration, Sensitivity, Growth, Respiration, Excretion, Nutrition 2.
    [Show full text]