ArticleSystematic biology2023
Increasing Information Content and Diagnosability in Family-Level Classifications.
Article in Systematic biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Mitochondrial andPeerJ · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Higher-level classifications often must account for monotypic taxa representing depauperate evolutionary lineages and lacking synapomorphies of their better-known, well-defined sister clades. In a ranked (Linnean) or unranked (phylogenetic) classification system, discovering such a depauperate taxon does not necessarily invalidate the rank classification of sister clades. Named higher taxa must be monophyletic to be phylogenetically valid. Ranked taxa above the species level should also maximize information content, diagnosability, and utility (e.g., in biodiversity conservation). In spider classification, families are the highest rank that is systematically catalogued, and incertae sedis is not allowed. Consequently, it is important that family-level taxa be well defined and informative. We revisit the classification problem of Orbipurae, an unranked suprafamilial clade containing the spider families Nephilidae, Phonognathidae, and Araneidae sensu stricto. We argue that, to maximize diagnosability, information content, conservation utility, and practical taxonomic considerations, this "splitting" scheme is superior to its recently proposed alternative, which lumps these families together as Araneidae sensu lato. We propose to redefine Araneidae and recognize a monogeneric spider family, Paraplectanoididae fam. nov. to accommodate the depauperate lineage Paraplectanoides. We present new subgenomic data to stabilize Orbipurae topology which also supports our proposed family-level classification. Our example from spiders demonstrates why classifications must be able to accommodate depauperate evolutionary lineages, for example, Paraplectanoides. Finally, although clade age should not be a criterion to determine rank, other things being equal, comparable ages of similarly ranked taxa do benefit comparative biology. [Classification, family rank, phylogenomics, systematics, monophyly, spider phylogeny.].
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.