Sex, drugs, & York - Monday, June 17th 2013 [email protected] A FEW DEFINITIONS: Taxonomy = the science of describing, naming & classifying living organisms Binomial nomenclature = formal scientific Latin names in two parts; Genus & species (or specific epithet) Angiosperms = the flowering plants Phylogenetics = the study of evolutionary relationships within and between groups of organisms Fact No.1: Taxonomy is the oldest profession in the World GENESIS chapter 2: 19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man. Fact No.2: Biology is a process Biology is not a static and un-altering product. This means that species cannot always be clearly & easily forced into neat boxes. NAMING & CLASSIFYING these are not necessarily the same thing (but they can be) Why do we NAME plants? Moon daisy, dog daisy, ox-eye daisy or marguerite? Always Leucanthemum vulgare everywhere The purpose of NAMING plants is for communication & gaining access to knowledge WHICH IS BETTER; vernacular or scientific names? NAMES of plants can be vernacular or scientific The advantage of vernacular names is that they are in the local language & so easier to remember. Also they can often be descriptive. The advantage of scientific names is that they are universal & unique to that species The accepted system of naming & classifying plants uses Latin names for each rank in a hierarchy. Latin is used because no one can claim that one nationality of botanists has an unfair advantage. ◄ Mahonia fortunei Why do we CLASSIFY plants? A purpose of CLASSIFYING is to create groups in order to organise information & knowledge. Without classification there would be chaos. HOW DO YOU CLASSIFY YOURS? A purpose of CLASSIFYING is to create groups in order to organise information & knowledge. Without classification there would be chaos. A purpose of CLASSIFYING is to create groups in order to organise information & knowledge. Without classification there would be chaos. GROUPS & CLASSIFICATIONS of plants can be vernacular or scientific WHICH IS BETTER; vernacular or scientific classification? The advantage of vernacular groups is that they are for a specific, local, practical purposes The advantage of scientific groups is that they are hierarchical predictive (practical) universal and each plant has one exclusive place Moss, fern, conifer, flowering plant The advantage of using scientific names AND groups is that they can be combined and related to each other. There are rules for the scientific naming of plants – the International Code for Botanical Nomenclature – and there are now some rules for scientific classification - it is not just intuition A BRIEF HISTORY of pre-Darwin NAMING & CLASSIFYING plants Chinese herbals Theophrastus 3rd century BC Theophrastus on umbels Umbellifers DIOSCORIDES 1st century AD De Materia Medica Robert Morison 17th century Oxford John Ray 1634-1703 - the 2nd greatest English natural historian ever 1) Defined “species” What is a species? A species is a group of individual plants that share a unique combination of characters (or features) which can be replicated John Ray 1634-1703 2) If you want to conserve a species then you need seeds not just cuttings etc. John Ray 1634-1703 3) He saw that when classifying plants, you must use every character that you can measure and that you cannot ignore anything without good reason John Ray 1634-1703 4) He put all flowering plants into either the monocots or the dicots Seeds with a single cotyledon Flowers with perianth and androecium segments in multiple of three Leaves with parallel veins Roots that function for one year only John Ray 1634-1703 5) He recognised many families that we still use Borage family Linnaeus 1707-1778 “The value of an aggregate of characters is very evident in natural history. Hence also, it has been found that a classification founded on any single character, however important that may be, has always failed.” Charles Darwin – Origin of Species Ray was right & Linnaeus was wrong 1753 is the starting point for legitimate species names Medicinal plants De Jussieu late 18th century French botanist 1789 is the starting point for the creation of legitimate family names. A family is a group of similar genera. All of the species in these genera share a unique combination of characters. One genus is considered to be typical of the family and the family name is derived from that genus by adding –aceae. 19th century Kew Mr George Bentham & Sir Joseph Hooker 19th century plant hunting expedition Making herbarium sheet for pasteurii Herbarium sheets Bentham & Hooker Genera Plantarum (1862-1883) 1) retained Ray’s Monocot/Dicot split 2) divided Dicots into three sub-classes i) petals free (not joined to each other) ii) petals fused (at least two petals joined) iii) petals absent (no obvious petals) 3) within these three sub-classes of dicots & the monocots, families were grouped on visible characters into orders Bentham & Hooker Genera Plantarum (1862-1883) No attempt was made to reflect evolution, perhaps because much of their work was carried out before the publication of The Origin of Species in 1859. Joseph Hooker was a regular correspondent of Charles Darwin Charles Darwin chapter 13 of the Origin of Species The birth of truly natural classifications From the first dawn of life, all organic being are found to resemble each other in descending degrees, so that they can be classified in groups under groups. This classification is evidently not arbitrary like the grouping of the stars in the constellations. Charles Darwin – Origin of Species In the hierarchy, each rank is just a group of the rank below. The accepted hierarchy is KINGDOM - kinky PHYLUM - prostitutes CLASS - can ORDER - offer FAMILY - fairly GENUS - good SPECIES - sex But once we know it is a flowering plant we generally only use FAMILY GENUS SPECIES The Natural System is founded on descent with modification; the characters which naturalists consider as showing true affinity between any two or more species, are those which have been inherited from a common parent. Charles Darwin – Origin of Species I believe that propinquity of descent is the descent, is the bond, hidden as it is by various degrees of modification, which is partially revealed to us by our classifications Charles Darwin – Origin of Species 1876 – Haekel’s phylogeny of land plants Fig. 1. Phylogenetic support across the NCBI taxonomy tree of eukaryotes Published by AAAS The less any part of the organisation is concerned with special habitats, the more important it becomes for classification. The mere physiological importance of an organ does not determine the classificatory value. Charles Darwin – Origin of Species For example, we do not automatically put all carnivorous plants in the same family Modern Kew 21st century Kew We have no written pedigrees; we have to make out continuity of descent by resemblances of any kind Charles Darwin – Origin of Species John Ray 1634-1703 You must use every character that you can measure and that you cannot ignore anything without good reason By 1998 we had some EXTRA CHARACTERS In addition to the morphological data that has been around since Theophrastus was a lad, the APG botanists looked at plants using electron microscopes and DNA sequencers. Molecular characters • 1953: Discovery of molecular structure of DNA • late 1980’s, DNA sequencing possible for relatively large numbers of taxa • 1998 - the first publication from the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG I) but no one would publish it Because the major journals would not publish the new ideas it was left to The Independent, 23-11-1998 though they got some of the story wrong (the red bits) “The science of botany has been turned upside down by a new classification of the world’s flowering plants and trees based on their DNA rather than their appearance” The Independent, 23-11-1998 When it is published next month in the Annals of Missouri Botanic Garden the classification, which for the first time establishes the relationships of all plant families through their genetic material will do away with 200 years of previous plant taxonomy dating back to Linnaeus. This has hitherto been based on flowers and other morphological characters CONCLUSIONS • The 1998 classification of flowering plants did not turn 200 years of botany on its head but rather added accurate resolution at the level of family • Some of these results were completely unexpected on the basis of morphology and highlighted the limitations of morphological data at some parts of the angiosperm tree. • But these results mostly corroborated much of what had been discovered or observed on the basis of morphology Changes prompted by the new classification 1) 73% of Bentham & Hooker’s families did not change 2) 13% had to change 3) 14% are still uncertain Plane trees & the Sacred Lotus, closest relatives? THE NEW BIT - MONOPHYLY formal adoption of Darwin’s philosophy All groups at every rank in the hierarchy must be monophyletic. A monophyletic group contains all of the descendants of an ancestral plant A BIG change that confirmed our worries: The dicots are NOT monophyletic meaning that there are some oddballs but the monocots defined by John Ray 300 years ago are still intact The independent, problem,basal dicots plants do not have pollen with three apertures (and other things) and so they are not true dicots Phylogeny Evolution other problem plants The Eudicots (the true dicots) The Monocots basal angiosperms Naturalists try to arrange species, genera, families in each class, in what is called THE NATURAL SYSTEM.