0
Protists are a paraphyletic group because animals, fungi, and plants are the crown groups evolved from different lineages of the protists. They aren't included in the same group as protists taxonomically. This explains why the cladists consider the protist a paraphyletic group.
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
A taxon such as the class reptilia which does not include its relatives the birds is... a. really an order b. a clade c. monophyletic d. polyphyletic e. paraphyletic?
e. paraphyletic
Which of the following statements is consistent with the assertion that protists are paraphyletic?
protists all share a common set of synapomorphies
How might the classification of protists change in the future?
New classifications of protists are attempting to present monophyletic groups based on structure, biochemistry and genetics.
Is green algae paraphyletic?
Yes!
What is the main problem with classifying protists?
Historical classificationsThe first division of the protists from other organisms came in the 1830s, when the German biologist Georg August Goldfuss introduced the word protozoa to refer to organisms such as ciliates and corals.[4] This group was expanded in 1845 to include all "unicellular animals", such as Foraminifera and amoebae. The formal taxonomic category Protoctista was first proposed in the early 1860s by John Hogg, who argued that the protists should include what he saw as primitive unicellular forms of both plants and animals. He defined the Protoctista as a "fourth kingdom of nature", in addition to the then-traditional kingdoms of plants, animals and minerals.[4] The kingdom of minerals was later removed from taxonomy by Ernst Haeckel, leaving plants, animals, and the protists as a "kingdom of primitive forms".[5]Herbert Copeland resurrected Hogg's label almost a century later, arguing that "Protoctista" literally meant "first established beings", Copeland complained that Haeckel's term protista included anucleated microbes such as bacteria. Copeland's use of the term protoctista did not. In contrast, Copeland's term included nucleated eukaryotes such as diatoms, green algae and fungi.[6] This classification was the basis for Whittaker's later definition of Fungi, Animalia, Plantae and Protista as the four kingdoms of life.[7] The kingdom Protista was later modified to separate prokaryotes into the separate kingdom of Monera, leaving the protists as a group of eukaryotic microorganisms.[8] These five kingdoms remained the accepted classification until the development of molecular phylogenetics in the late 20th century, when it became apparent that neither protists nor monera were single groups of related organisms (they were not monophyletic groups).[9]Modern classificationsCurrently, the term protist is used to refer to unicellular eukaryotes that either exist as independent cells, or if they occur in colonies, do not show differentiation into tissues.[10] The term protozoa is used to refer to heterotrophic species of protists that do not form filaments. These terms are not used in current taxonomy, and are retained only as convenient ways to refer to these organisms. The taxonomy of protists is still changing. Newer classifications attempt to present monophyletic groups based on ultrastructure, biochemistry, and genetics. Because the protists as a whole are paraphyletic, such systems often split up or abandon the kingdom, instead treating the protist groups as separate lines of eukaryotes. The recent scheme by Adl et al. (2005)[10] is an example that does not bother with formal ranks (phylum, class, etc.) and instead lists organisms in hierarchical lists. This is intended to make the classification more stable in the long term and easier to update. Some of the main groups of protists, which may be treated as phyla, are listed in the taxobox at right.[11] Many are thought to be monophyletic, though there is still uncertainty. For instance, the excavates are probably not monophyletic and the chromalveolates are probably only monophyletic if the haptophytes and cryptomonads are excluded.
A taxon such as the class reptilia which does not include its relatives the birds is... a. really an order b. a clade c. monophyletic d. polyphyletic e. paraphyletic?
e. paraphyletic
Which of the following are problematic when the goal is to construct phylogenies that accurately reflect evolutionary history A monophyletic taxa B polyphyletic taxa C paraphyletic taxa?
Polyphyletic and paraphyletic taxa are problematic when the goal is to construct phylogenies that accurately reflect evolutionary history. These taxa do not accurately represent the evolutionary relationships between species and can lead to incorrect interpretations. Monophyletic taxa, on the other hand, are ideal for constructing phylogenies as they include all descendants of a common ancestor.
Are echinoderms monophyletic or polyphyletic?
monophyletic
Why is the kingdom animalia polyphyletic and not monophyletic?
Its not polyphyletic, its monophyletic. There are no points where members stop being animals. Many mistake Porifera (sponges) as an exception, but they are animals too.
Why are prokaryotes not monophyletic?
Protists are a paraphyletic group because animals, fungi, and plants are the crown groups evolved from different lineages of the protists. They aren't included in the same group as protists taxonomically. This explains why the cladists consider the protist a paraphyletic group.
Why are animals monophyletic?
Because they're descended from a common ancestor and the classified group includes all animals. The other kinds, para- and polyphyletic groups, are classified groups that have multiple ancestors (poly) or are a single group but with parts excluded (para). Carnivorous plants are polyphyletic, as they include many different genera, and reptiles are paraphyletic, because it excludes birds which are technically still reptiles.
Which of the following statements is consistent with the assertion that protists are paraphyletic?
protists all share a common set of synapomorphies
How might the classification of protists change the future?
New classifications of protists are attempting to present monophyletic groups based on structure, biochemistry and genetics.
How might the classification of protists change in the future?
New classifications of protists are attempting to present monophyletic groups based on structure, biochemistry and genetics.
Identify a major source of evidence used by scientists who advocate the adoption of the three-domain system for classifying living things?
Researchers have performed comparative genomic analysis of the two main prokaryotic groups and found them more different from each other, and from eukaryotes, than previously thought. For evolutionary classification to be valid, a clade must be monophyletic, that is, contain only the descendants of one common ancestor. Protists are not monophyletic, they are paraphyletic. The result is the advocation of the use of a three-domain system.
How might the classification of protist change in the future?
New classifications of protists are attempting to present monophyletic groups based on structure, biochemistry and genetics.
Are snakes and lizards polyphyletic?
yes they r polyphyletic
