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.
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?
The statement "Protists are a diverse group of eukaryotic organisms that do not fit neatly into the plant, animal, or fungi kingdoms" is consistent with the idea that protists are paraphyletic. This is because protists traditionally grouped together organisms that are not closely related in terms of evolutionary history.
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.
What are the kingdom schemes and examples of each?
The three main kingdom schemes are Monophyletic (includes all descendants from a common ancestor, like Mammals), Paraphyletic (includes the common ancestor but not all descendants, like Reptiles), and Polyphyletic (does not include the common ancestor, like Invertebrates). Each scheme groups organisms based on evolutionary relationships.
Are fish monophyletic?
No, fish are not monophyletic. The term "fish" is a paraphyletic group because it includes some but not all descendants of a common ancestor. It does not include tetrapods (four-limbed vertebrates such as amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) which share a more recent common ancestor with some fish species.
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
Are echinoderms monophyletic or polyphyletic?
monophyletic
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.
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?
Prokaryotes are not monophyletic because they include both bacteria and archaea, which are two distinct groups with different evolutionary histories. These two groups do not share a common recent ancestor, making prokaryotes 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?
The statement "Protists are a diverse group of eukaryotic organisms that do not fit neatly into the plant, animal, or fungi kingdoms" is consistent with the idea that protists are paraphyletic. This is because protists traditionally grouped together organisms that are not closely related in terms of evolutionary history.
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.
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.
What are the kingdom schemes and examples of each?
The three main kingdom schemes are Monophyletic (includes all descendants from a common ancestor, like Mammals), Paraphyletic (includes the common ancestor but not all descendants, like Reptiles), and Polyphyletic (does not include the common ancestor, like Invertebrates). Each scheme groups organisms based on evolutionary relationships.
Are fish monophyletic?
No, fish are not monophyletic. The term "fish" is a paraphyletic group because it includes some but not all descendants of a common ancestor. It does not include tetrapods (four-limbed vertebrates such as amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) which share a more recent common ancestor with some fish species.
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.
