How to Write Scientific Names

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Writing Centre How to Write Scientific Names A taxon is a group, of one or more organisms, of equal rank within the hierarchical and phylogenetic organization. Categories of taxa include: species, genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom. When referring to species, the first part of the name identifies the genus to which the species belongs, while the second part – the specific name or specific epithet – identifies the species within the genus. For example, humans belong to the genus Homo, and within this genus to the species Homo sapien. • Family (and higher): capitalized only (not italicized) (e.g., Hominidae) • Genus: capitalized and italicized (e.g., Homo) • Species: italicized only (not capitalized), but follows genus (e.g., Homo sapiens). • Variants: italicized only (not capitalized) After the first mention, you can abbreviate the genus (e.g., H. sapiens). Scientific names must be provided at least once. If you wish to switch to a common name, put the common name in brackets immediately after the first mention. Refer to the common name from then on. Common names are not capitalized and not italicized. Correct: Homo sapiens (humans) walk upright. Humans like music. If a taxon is made common, such as Hominidae to "hominid”, it is not capitalized or italicized. Taxon are preferred singular. This may be confusing when taxon end with an “s”. Note: Do not add “s” or “es” to make species plural. Incorrect: Thousands of Pinus radiates… Correct: Thousands of Pinus radiate… Note: Do not remove “s” to make the sentence sound normal. The word “sapiens” is preferred singular. Incorrect: Two Homo sapien males… Correct: Two Homo sapiens males… You can refer to unspecified species of a known genus with an abbreviation. Please note that this abbreviation is not italicized. Singular = sp. Plural = spp. Correct: The collection included one Sphagnum sp. and several Pleurozium spp. © Kyle Gillich .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Hands-On Human Evolution: a Laboratory Based Approach
Hands-on Human Evolution: A Laboratory Based Approach Developed by Margarita Hernandez Center for Precollegiate Education and Training Author: Margarita Hernandez Curriculum Team: Julie Bokor, Sven Engling A huge thank you to….. Contents: 4. Author’s note 5. Introduction 6. Tips about the curriculum 8. Lesson Summaries 9. Lesson Sequencing Guide 10. Vocabulary 11. Next Generation Sunshine State Standards- Science 12. Background information 13. Lessons 122. Resources 123. Content Assessment 129. Content Area Expert Evaluation 131. Teacher Feedback Form 134. Student Feedback Form Lesson 1: Hominid Evolution Lab 19. Lesson 1 . Student Lab Pages . Student Lab Key . Human Evolution Phylogeny . Lab Station Numbers . Skeletal Pictures Lesson 2: Chromosomal Comparison Lab 48. Lesson 2 . Student Activity Pages . Student Lab Key Lesson 3: Naledi Jigsaw 77. Lesson 3 Author’s note Introduction Page The validity and importance of the theory of biological evolution runs strong throughout the topic of biology. Evolution serves as a foundation to many biological concepts by tying together the different tenants of biology, like ecology, anatomy, genetics, zoology, and taxonomy. It is for this reason that evolution plays a prominent role in the state and national standards and deserves thorough coverage in a classroom. A prime example of evolution can be seen in our own ancestral history, and this unit provides students with an excellent opportunity to consider the multiple lines of evidence that support hominid evolution. By allowing students the chance to uncover the supporting evidence for evolution themselves, they discover the ways the theory of evolution is supported by multiple sources. It is our hope that the opportunity to handle our ancestors’ bone casts and examine real molecular data, in an inquiry based environment, will pique the interest of students, ultimately leading them to conclude that the evidence they have gathered thoroughly supports the theory of evolution.
[Show full text]
I Reach Toward the Ground I Reach Toward Space
Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2016 I Reach Toward the Ground I Reach Toward Space Kristen A. Sanders Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd Part of the Fine Arts Commons © The Author Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/4240 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ©Kristen Ann Sanders 2016 All Rights Reserved I Reach Toward the Ground I Reach Toward Space A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Fine Arts at Virginia Commonwealth University. By Kristen Ann Sanders Masters of Fine Arts, Virginia Commonwealth University, 2016 Bachelor of Arts, University of California Davis, 2012 Director: Gregory Volk, Associate Professor, Painting and Printmaking Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia May, 2016 ii Acknowledgements To the Australopithecines, aquatic or otherwise. To the fragmented femurs and angled pelvic bones and rows of molars and fossilized footprints. To the stone flakes and engraved rocks and stained cave walls. To all of the extinct members of Hominidae — the makers, the foragers, the traversers, and discoverers. And to all those are who are living today that have shown me so much love and
[Show full text]
Hominidae Family Tree
Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial || Student Handout Hominidae Family Tree This is a phylogenetic tree, which is a hypothesis of This tree also includes information about the number the evolutionary history of a group of organisms. This of chromosomes for each species. What do you notice tree is known as the Hominidae family tree. It was about the similarities and differences in number of created by comparing the DNA sequences of humans, chromosomes among the species in this family? If chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans. humans and chimpanzees share an extinct common Each juncture in the tree represents when a species ancestor, why do they have a different number of is estimated to have branched off. For example, the chromosomes? With your team members, develop chimp and bonobo have the most recent common two hypotheses that—given a hypothetical extinct extinct ancestor, some three million years ago. The common ancestor—would explain why humans and next-most-recent common extinct ancestor—the one chimpanzees have a different number of chromo- shared by chimpanzees and humans—is at about six somes. Include in your hypotheses how many million years ago. chromosomes you think an extinct common ancestor would have had. Write your hypotheses on a separate sheet of paper. Orangutan Gorilla Chimpanzee Bonobo Human 48 chromosomes 48 chromosomes 48 chromosomes 48 chromosomes 46 chromosomes (24 pairs) (24 pairs) (24 pairs) (24 pairs) (23 pairs) Present Extinct common ancestor of chimpanzee and bonobo 3 million years ago 6 million years ago Extinct common ancestor of chimpanzees (including bonobo) and human 8 million years ago Extinct common ancestor of gorilla, chimpanzees, and human Extinct common ancestor of orangutan, gorilla, chimpanzees, and human Foundation 13 million years ago Educational WGBH Note: Dates are based on genomic analysis and are approximate.
[Show full text]
Tempo and Mode in Human Evolution (Auuwlopitaecus/Hono/Phylogeny/Blpim/Encephaizatlou) HENRY M
Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 91, pp. 6780-6786, July 1994 Colloquium Paper This paper was presented at a colloquium ented "Tempo and Mode in Evolution" organized by Walter M. Fitch and Francisco J. Ayala, held January 27-29, 1994, by the National Academy of Sciences, in Irvine, CA. Tempo and mode in human evolution (AuuWlopitaecus/Hono/phylogeny/blpim/encephaizatlou) HENRY M. MCHENRY Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 ABSTRACT The quickening pace of paleontological dis- africanus, A. robustus, A. boisei, and early Homo. A. covery is matched by rapid developments in geochronology. aethiopicus branches from this clade next with A. afarensis These new data show that the pattern of morphological change as a sister species to all later hominids. In the hominid lineage was mosaic. Adaptations essential to Fig. 1B displays the phylogenetic tree implied by the most bipedalism appeared early, but some locomotor features parsimonious cladogram. This phylogeny implies that A. qfa- changed much later. Relative to the highly derived postrania rensis is the most primitive hominid and that all later honilnids of the earliest hominid, the craniodental complex was quite shared a common ancestor that was more derived than A. primitive (i.e., like the reconstructed last common ancestor afarensis. This post-afarensis hypothetical ancestor may some- with the African great apes). The pattern of craniodental day be discovered. Its morphology can be reconstructed by change among successively younger species of Hoinndae im- observing the many ways A. aethiopicus resembles later hom- plies extensive parallel evolution between at least two lineages inids (especially A.
[Show full text]
Hominid/Human Evolution
Hominid/Human Evolution Geology 331 Paleontology Primate Classification- 1980’s Order Primates Suborder Prosimii: tarsiers and lemurs Suborder Anthropoidea: monkeys, apes, and hominids Superfamily Hominoidea Family Pongidae: great apes Family Hominidae: Homo and hominid ancestors Primate Classification – 2000’s Order Primates Suborder Prosimii: tarsiers and lemurs Suborder Anthropoidea: monkeys, apes, and hominids Superfamily Hominoidea Family Hylobatidae: gibbons Family Hominidae Subfamily Ponginae: orangutans Subfamily Homininae: gorillas, chimps, Homo and hominin ancestors % genetic similarity 96% 100% with humans 95% 98% 84% 58% 91% Prothero, 2007 Tarsiers, a primitive Primate (Prosimian) from Southeast Asia. Tarsier sanctuary, Philippines A Galago or bush baby, a primitive Primate (Prosimian) from Africa. A Slow Loris, a primitive Primate (Prosimian) from Southeast Asia. Check out the fingers. Lemurs, primitive Primates (Prosimians) from Madagascar. Monkeys, such as baboons, have tails and are not hominoids. Smallest Primate – Pygmy Marmoset, a New World monkey from Brazil Proconsul, the oldest hominoid, 18 MY Hominoids A lesser ape, the Gibbon from Southeast Asia, a primitive living hominoid similar to Proconsul. Male Female Hominoids The Orangutan, a Great Ape from Southeast Asia. Dogs: Hominoids best friend? Gorillas, Great Apes from Africa. Bipedal Gorilla! Gorilla enjoying social media Chimp Gorilla Chimpanzees, Great I’m cool Apes from Africa. Pan troglodytes Chimps are simple tool users Chimp Human Neoteny in Human Evolution.
[Show full text]
Supporting Information
Supporting Information Moya` -Sola` et al. 10.1073/pnas.0811730106 SI Text netic relationships between all these taxa by classifying them all Systematic Framework. In Table S1 we provide a systematic into a single family Afropithecidae with 2 subfamilies (Keny- classification of living and fossil Hominoidea to the tribe level, apithecinae and Afropithecinae). by further including extant taxa and extinct genera discussed in The systematic scheme used here requires several nomencla- this paper. Hominoidea are defined as the group constituted by tural decisions, which deserve further explanation. The nomina Hylobatidae and Hominidae, plus all extinct taxa more closely Kenyapithecini and Kenyapithecinae are adopted instead of related to them than to Cercopithecoidea. Hominidae, in turn, Griphopithecinae and Griphopithecini (see also ref. 25) merely are defined as the group containing Ponginae and Homininae, because the former have priority. It is unclear why neither Begun plus all extinct forms more closely related to them than to (1) nor Kelley (2) specify the authorship of Griphopithecinae (or Hylobatidae. While this broad concept of Hominidae is currently Griphopithecidae), but, to our knowledge, the authorship of the used by many paleoprimatologists (e.g., refs. 1–2), the systematic latter nomina must be attributed to Begun (ref. 4, p. 232: Table position of primitive (or archaic) putative hominoids is far from 10.1), which therefore do not have priority over Kenyapithecinae clear (see below). Begun (3–5) employs the terms ‘‘Eohomi- Andrews, 1992. Griphopithecinae thus remains potentially valid noidea’’ and ‘‘Euhominoidea’’ to informally refer to hominoids only if Kenyapithecus (and Afropithecus, see below) are excluded of primitive and modern aspect, respectively.
[Show full text]
1999, 2000, Gregory Carey Chapter 14: Human Evolution - 1
© 1999, 2000, Gregory Carey Chapter 14: Human Evolution - 1 Chapter 14: Human Evolution How Humans Evolved Protohuman Evolution Anyone reading this section 50 years from now will laugh at its naiveté, and the reason for his or her bemused state will be justified. The discovery of new fossils, the sequencing of the human genome, and the completion of the Human Genome Diversity Project will provide new insights that alter currently cherished beliefs. This has been the history of science in human evolution, so there is no reason to suspect that the trend will change. Still, we are stuck in the present and must do the best we can with the available data. Most biologists suspect that humans and chimpanzees (our closest genetic relative) split off from a common ancestor as recently as 4 to 5 million years ago (mya)1. The split occurred in Africa. One of the first evolutionary developments that distinguish human ancestors from chimps was upright posture. One of the earliest of the human genera (plural of genus), the Australopithecines (a Latin term for “southern ape”), walked upright and had modified hands, but in many other ways resembled a chimp. They were small (between 3 and 4 feet tall), had curved fingers, and a skull with a protruding jaw, a recessed cranium, and heavy ridges behind what are now the eyebrows. 1 In terms of biological classification,, the split resulted in the development of the family Hominidae. Hence, the term hominid refers to all of our ancient ancestors from this split onward. © 1999, 2000, Gregory Carey Chapter 14: Human Evolution - 2 The reason for the development of upright posture is unknown, but it certainly permitted the Australopithecines to travel long distances, freed their hands to carry objects, and may even have allowed more efficient thermoregulation.
[Show full text]
Australopithecines, Australopiths Kevin D
Australopithecines: 1 Australopithecines, australopiths Kevin D. Hunt Department of Anthropology Indiana University Bloomington, IN 47405 Phone: (812) 855 2555 “Australopithecine” is the informal adjective designating members of the taxonomic subfamily Australopithecinae, which with the Homininae constitute the family Hominidae. The Hominidae are humans, human ancestors and collateral species after the lineage branched from that leading to chimpanzees. Recently, paleontologists, influenced by evidence from genetics that apes and humans are more closely related than traditional taxonomy reflected, have pulled African apes into the Hominidae, with repercussions right down the taxonomic scale. Under the new scheme, gorillas are in the subfamily Gorillinae and chimpanzees and humans are in the Homininae. The Homininae is divided into two tribes, the Panini for chimpanzees and Hominini for our own lineage. Our tribe, the Hominini, is divided into two subtribes, the Australopithecina (less formally “australopiths”) and the Hominina, which contains only the genus Homo. Except for specialists, the new taxonomy hardly affects the australopithecines. There is but a single difference: “australopithecines” are now referred to as “australopiths.” The old and new schemes are given in Table 1 (adapted from Wood and Richmond, 2000). Taxa in bold are discussed in this entry. Table 1. Traditional and Revised Ape and Human Taxonomy Traditional taxonomy Superfamily Hominoidea (apes and humans; informally “hominoids”) Family Hylobatidae Genus Hylobates Family
[Show full text]
Human Evolution
Human Evolution “light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history” Humans and primates • Prosimians – Lemurs, bushbabies • Simians are monkeys – New world monkeys (platyrhini) – Old world monkeys (catarrhini) • Apes – Hominidae Humans closely related to African great apes • Sarich and Wilson 1967 • Serum albumin reaction – Rabbit antibodies • Dated with fossils – Old world monkeys and apes 30 mya • Humans and African great apes last shared a common ancestor 5 mya Humans more closely related to chimps than gorillas • 3 molecular phylogenies – mtDNA (maternal) – Y-linked gene (paternal) – Autosomal genes Importance of concordance • Concordance means agreement – Results with those three different data sets agree – Important because molecular phylogenies trace history of genes – Of 14 separate independent data sets • 11 show humans and chimps • 2 show gorillas and chimps • 1 shows humans and gorillas Species trees and gene trees Concensus, conclusion? • Humans and chimps shared recent common ancestry – About 5 mya • Gorillas likely the next most closely related – orangutan Recent Human Ancestry • Ok, so humans and chimps split 5 mya • What might the common ancestor have been like? – Parsimony: limited tool use, broad diet, cooperative group living • Hunting, warfare, cannibalism, social alliances, status • What evidence is there of the lineage of humans AFTER that split – I.e., the recent ancestry of the human lineage Gracile Australopithecines • small braincases • 400 to 500 cc • walked on two legs • female 1 meter tall • males 1.5 meter bipedalism Robust Australopithecines • Small brained – larger than gracile Australopithecus • Large bony crest – Jaw muscle attachments • Bipedal • Similar size to gracile Australopithecus Archaic humans, Genus Homo • All African • H.
[Show full text]
Molecular Systematics of Higher Primates: Genealogical Relations
Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 85, pp. 7627-7631, October 1988 Evolution Molecular systematics of higher primates: Genealogical relations and classification (DNA sequences/rhesus macaque/human evolution/phylogeny/globin gene region) MICHAEL M. MIYAMOTO*t, BEN F. Koopf, JERRY L. SLIGHTOM§1, MORRIS GOODMAN¶, AND MICHELE R. TENNANT11 *Department of Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611; Departments of tMolecular Biology and Genetics and lAnatomy and Cell Biology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201; §Division of Molecular Biology, The Upjohn Company, Kalamazoo, MI 49001; and I'Department of Biological Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202 Communicated by Charles G. Sibley, June 20, 1988 (receivedfor review April 7, 1988) ABSTRACT We obtained 5' and 3' flnking sequences (and not a monophyletic Pongidae). At present, the (5.4 kilobase pairs) from the *V-globin gene region of the human/African ape grouping remains the most widely ac- rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) and combined them with cepted hypothesis, as it is heavily supported by both available nucleotide data. The completed sequence, represent- DNA-DNA hybridization (13, 14) and nucleotide sequence ing 10.8 kilobase pairs of contiguous noncoding DNA, was (15) data. compared to the same orthologous regions available for human The P-globin gene family in catarrhine primates [humans, (Homo sapiens, as represented by five different alleles), com- great apes, and Old World monkeys (family Cercopitheci- mon chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), gorilla (Gorilla gorilla), and dae)] has been well characterized in terms of its evolution, orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus). The nucleotide sequence for structure, and function (16). In catarrhines, this cluster Macaca mulatto provided the outgroup perspective needed to consists of six (3-related globin genes linked 5' to 3': E evaluate better the relationships of humans and great apes.
[Show full text]
Evolution of Life History and Behavior in Hominidae: Towards Phylogenetic Reconstruction of the Chimpanzee- Human Last Common Ancestor
University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice Faculty of Science Evolution of life history and behavior in Hominidae: Towards phylogenetic reconstruction of the chimpanzee- human last common ancestor RNDr. Thesis Mgr. Pavel Duda České Budějovice 2017 This thesis should be cited as: Duda, P., 2017: Evolution of life history and behavior in Hominidae: Towards phylogenetic reconstruction of the chimpanzee-human last common ancestor. RNDr. Thesis, 23 pp. Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czech Republic. Annotation The origin of the fundamental behavioral differences between humans and our closest living relatives is one of the central issues of evolutionary anthropology. In this study we performed a series of phylogenetic comparative analyses using 65 selected life-history and behavioral characters for all extant hominid species to reconstruct the ancestral character states of the last common ancestors of Hominidae, Homininae and Hominini (the chimpanzee-human last common ancestor). These analyses show that many fundamental behavioral and life-history attributes of hominids (including humans) are evidently ancient and likely inherited from the common ancestor of all hominids. On the other hand, numerous behaviors present in extant great apes represent their own terminal autapomorphies (both uniquely derived and homoplastic). We demonstrate that phylogenetic reconstruction of ancestral states is able to provide a detailed suite of behavioral, ecological and life-history characters for each hypothetical ancestor. The living great apes therefore play an important role for the identification of the traits found in the chimpanzee-human last common ancestor, some of which are likely to represent behaviors of the fossil hominins. Declaration [in Czech] Prohlašuji, že v souladu s § 47b zákona č.
[Show full text]
When Did We Become Human? Evolutionary Perspectives on the Emergence of the Modern Human Mind, Brain, and Culture
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Department of Anthropology Papers Department of Anthropology 2007 When Did We Become Human? Evolutionary Perspectives on the Emergence of the Modern Human Mind, Brain, and Culture Theodore G. Schurr University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/anthro_papers Part of the Anthropology Commons, and the Genetics Commons Recommended Citation (OVERRIDE) Schurr, T. G (2007). When Did We Become Human? Evolutionary Perspectives on the Emergence of the Modern Human Mind, Brain, and Culture. In G. Hatfield & H. Pittman (Eds.), Evolution of Mind, Brain, and Culture (45-89). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum Press. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/anthro_papers/165 For more information, please contact [email protected]. When Did We Become Human? Evolutionary Perspectives on the Emergence of the Modern Human Mind, Brain, and Culture Disciplines Anthropology | Genetics | Social and Behavioral Sciences This book chapter is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/anthro_papers/165 2 When Did We Become Human? Evolutionary Perspectives on the Emergence of the Modern Human Mind, Brain, and Culture theodore g. schurr ne of the most longstanding debates in the field of biological anthro- Opology is when members of our lineage became “human.” There is keen interest in knowing when we evolved the characteristics seen in our species, and which of these features truly makes us distinctive from other primates and especially earlier forms of hominins. Language, culture, tool use, brain size, and bipedalism have all been cited as traits that differentiate modern humans from other primate species.
[Show full text]