Evolutionary trees (caulograms) and phylogenetic cladograms for both morphological and molecular analyses of certain species in the moss genus Didymodon (Pottiaceae, Bryophyta) were compared. A new two-step macrosystematic (macroevolutionary systematics) method of calculating statistical support for both linear order and lineage direction of evolution is introduced. This involves clustering of taxa in sets by minimization of redundancy using cladograms and minimum parsimony, then building an often-branched linear model by maximization of information on gradual evolution by ordering species through adding informational bits for advanced traits and subtracting them for reversals. Cladistic analysis is considered to be similar to cryptographic code-breaking, with that code key then used for model-building following theory. Very high Bayesian support was computed for lineages in the morphological analyses, which stand up well to high support for past molecular studies. The caulogram allowed for predictions not possible with cladograms. The importance of using information on both shared and serial descent is discussed.

Keywords: analytic key, cladogram, classification, evolution, information theory, macrosystematics, paraphyly, phylogenetics, Didymodon, Pottiaceae

Full text: PDF (Eng) 740K

1. Assis L.C.S., Rieppel O. Cladistics, 2010, 26: 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00297.x
2. Bock W.J. Zool. Sci., 2003, 20: 279–289. http://dx.doi.org/10.2108/zsj.20.279
3. Brooks D.R., Wiley E.O. Evolution as Entropy: Toward a Unified Theory of Biology, Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, pp. 1988.
4. Brummitt R.K. Taxon, 1997, 46: 723–734. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1224478
5. Brummitt R.K. Taxon, 2002, 51: 31–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1554961
6. Brummitt R.K. Taxon, 2003, 52: 803–804. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3647353
7. Brummitt R.K. Taxon, 2006, 55: 268–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/25065576
8. Crawford D.J. Taxon, 2010, 59: 1413–1423.
9. Farjon A. Taxon, 2007, 56: 639–641. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/25065847
10. FNA. The Flora of North America North of Mexico. Flora of North America Editorial Committee, New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2007, vol. 27.
11. Good I.J. Biometrika, 1979, 66: 393–396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/66.2.393
12. Hörandl E. Taxon, 2006, 55: 564–570. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/25065631
13. Hörandl E. Taxon, 2007, 56: 1–5.
14. Hörandl E. Taxon, 2010, 59: 345–350.
15. Hörandl E., Emadzade K. Perspectives Pl. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 2012, 14: 310–324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2012.04.001
16. Hörandl E., Stuessy T.F. Taxon, 2010, 59: 1641–1653.
17. Mayr E., Bock W.J. J. Zool. Evol. Res., 2002, 40: 169–194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0469.2002.00211.x
18. McGrayne S.B. The Theory That Would Not Die: How Bayes’ Rule Cracked the Enigma Code. New Haven; Connecticut: Yale Univ. Press, 2011.
19. Nordal I., Stedje B. Taxon, 2005, 54: 5–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/25065296
20. Popadin K., Polishchuk L.V., Mamirova L., Knorre D., Gunbin K. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 2007, 104: 13390–13395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701256104
21. Rieppel O. Cladistics, 2010, 26: 103–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00274.x
22. Robinson H. Taxon, 1986, 35: 309–311. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1221274
23. Shannon C., Weaver W. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, Illinois: Univ. Illinois Press, 1963.
24. Sosef M.S.M. Taxon, 1997, 46: 75–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1224293
25. Stuessy T.F., Hörandl E. Cladistics, 2014, 30: 291–293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cla.12038
26. Stuessy T.F., König C. Taxon, 2008, 57: 594–601.
27. Werner O., Jiménez J.A., Ros R.M., Cano M.J., Guerra J. Syst. Bot., 2005, 30: 461–470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1600/0363644054782198
28. Zander R.H. Bull. Buffalo Soc. Nat. Sci., 1998, 36: 81–115.
29. Zander R.H. Phyloinformatics, 2004, 2: 1–13.
30. Zander R.H. Taxon, 2007, 56: 642–644. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/25065848
31. Zander R.H. Taxon, 2008a, 57: 1182–1188.
32. Zander R.H. Bryologist, 2008b, 111: 292–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1639/0007-2745(2008)111[292:SEOTCR]2.0.CO;2
33. Zander R.H. Anal. Jardín Bot. Madrid, 2009, 66: 263–277.
34. Zander R.H. Pl. Syst. Evol., 2010a, 286: 69–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-010-0281-6
35. Zander R.H. Biol. Theory, 2010b, 5: 383–394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_a_00063
36. Zander R.H. Framework for Post-Phylogenetic Systematics, St. Louis: Zetetic Publ., 2013.
37. Zander R.H. Phytoneuron, 2014a, 2014-78: 1–7.
38. Zander R.H. Phytoneuron, 2014b, 2014-79: 1–23.
39. Zander R.H. Phytoneuron, 2014c, 2014-80: 1–19.
40. Zander R.H. Phytoneuron, 2014d, 2014-110: 1–4.
41. Zherikhin V.V. Cladistics in palaeontology: Problems and constraints, Proc. of the First Palaeoentomological Conf., Moscow 1998, 1998, pp. 193–199.