CHARACTER DEFINITIONS AND CHARACTER STATE DELINEATION: THE BETE NOIRE OF PHYLOGENETIC INFERENCE
Open Access
- 1 December 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Cladistics
- Vol. 6 (4) , 319-361
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.1990.tb00549.x
Abstract
Abstract— Currently characters are static concepts whose definition and state delineations seldom undergo any scrutiny. Common systematic practice tends to synthesize character slates by combining or dividing observed conditions, a situation most likely due to current theoretical limitations in phylogenetic inference, which tends to ignore problems of multistate characters. This process we refer to as the “synthetic” method for character definition. Character definitions derived for the genera of North American Cochylini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) using “synthetic” character states postulated that the cochylines were not monophyletic. The use of cladogram characters and nearest neighbor matrices in uncovering potential flaws in character state delineation is demonstrated. The “synthetic” set of character definitions proved deficient upon such analysis, principally due to its attempt to force highly variable features into a few states. The set of character definitions produced from this analysis is referred to as “reflective” because it does not ignore observed variation. It produces characters with many states and presents problems of setting up transformation series. Three means lor deriving transformations are applied to produce transformation series for the reflective set of character definitions: the unordered outgroup method, morphocline analysis and Transformation Series Analysis (TSA). All three data sets postulated the Cochylini as monophyletic. The three sets of phylogenies were compared. Consensus trees are ambiguous when analysing changes in hierarchy. In order to summarize these results in a manner which does not destroy the phylogenetic structure, positional subtrees, a new means for summarizing multiple solution cladograms, are introduced. It was found that all three sets of transformations produced very different cladograms which in turn were very different from the tree produced by the original, synthetic definitions. The results of each of these methods were assessed for their internal consistency. TSA gave the least contradictory results.This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- EVOLUTIONARY CHARACTER ANALYSIS: TRACING CHARACTER CHANGE ON A CLADOGRAMCladistics, 1990
- Note on the Phylogenetic Systematics of the Family Pteronarcyidae (Plecoptera), with a Description of the Eggs and Nymphs of the Asian SpeciesAnnals of the Entomological Society of America, 1988
- Generic relationships within the Euglossini (Hymenoptera: Apidae)Systematic Entomology, 1987
- Phylogeny and systematics of the Trogidae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea)Systematic Entomology, 1986
- Systematics of Crumomyia Macquart and Alloborborus Duda (Diptera: Sphaeroceridae)Systematic Entomology, 1985
- The systematic position of Antirrhea and Caerois, with comments on the classification of the Nymphalidae (Lepidoptera)Systematic Entomology, 1985
- A Revision of the Austrlian Genus Epitymbia Meyrick, with Remarks on the Epitymbiini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)Australian Journal of Zoology, 1985
- Transformation Series AnalysisSystematic Zoology, 1982
- Quantitative Phyletics and the Evolution of AnuransSystematic Zoology, 1969
- Morphological Criteria of Phyletic RelationshipsSystematic Zoology, 1952