Re: Systematics and Paleontology (posted for Dinogeorge)

[N.MacLeod@xxxxxxxxx (N. MacLeod)]

From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 18:19:40 -0400
To: paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk, paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Systematics and Paleontology
Status: O

In a message dated 95-10-04 16:55:41 EDT, tey7004@geopsun.tamu.edu (Thomas E.
Yancey) writes:

>Systematics seems to have become subsumed within the theme of determining
>phylogeny. In the process, descriptive systematic study is being lost in the

>welter of debate on how best to portray degrees of relatedness among taxa.
>This
>philosophic quarrel inhibits workers from doing routine systematic work and
>raises questions about the proper procedures for doing systematics. Is
>learning
>the intricacies of cladistic methodologies more important than learning the
>details of character state determination needed for completing a
>comprehensive
>morphologic description of a taxon? Both require considerable skill in
>application to obtain useful results. In most cases, the teaching of skills
>in
>character state determination is the secondary step, especially since
>relationships are evaluated on the basis of a selected set of characters,
not
>a
>comprehensive set.

A friend recently relayed the following tidbit in this regard, from an
upcoming paleontology graduate student: "I don't do descriptions; I score
characters." The latest trend?