phyla/divisions

David Haas dhaas at CHI1.UNCFSU.EDU
Wed Mar 13 12:53:34 EST 1996


> Esther G. McLaughlin  said:

> I believe the nomenclatorial (nomenclatural?) powers-that-be dumped
> "division" (thank heavens) some time ago, admitting that, the lower you get
> (phylogenetically, not morally), the less any distinction between
> plant-like and animal-like organisms gets; therefore, such naming
> distinctions have little logic. So it's "phylum" for all, and all for
> phylum.
> 

When did this happen?   Most botany books retain the division 
catagory.    I agree with the concept but if division was dumped why 
does it persist in the latest texts?   I wish everyone could get 
together and  AGREE  on some of this classification and terminology 
stuff.   Text authors don't use the same spellings and terminology , 
ie.  ascoma or ascocarp?    prokaryotic or procaryotic?  Protista or 
Protoctista ?   If a peptide is 2 or more amino acids joined by a 
peptide bond whats a dipeptide?   Its not the big problems its the 
little ones !   I' m not paranoid  I KNOW everyone is out 
to get me.  :-)

d haas



More information about the Plant-ed mailing list