International Journal of Primatology

, Volume 25, Issue 5, pp 1105–1126 | Cite as

The What, Why and How of Primate Taxonomy

  • Colin Groves

Abstract

Taxonomy has a well-defined role, which is much more than simply stamp-collecting and pigeon-holing. Species are the units of classification, biogeography and conservation; as such they must be defined as objectively as possible. The biological species concept, still widely used in biology, though predominantly by non-taxonomists and all too often misunderstood, is a process-based concept, which offers no criterion for the classification of allopatric populations beyond inference and hypothesis. The phylogenetic species concept—a pattern-based concept—is as nearly objective as we are likely to get. Amount of difference is not a criterion for recognizing species. It is not possible to insist on monophyly at the specific level, but it is mandatory for the higher categories (genus, family, etc.). The rank we assign to a given supraspecific category should be determined by its time depth.

taxonomy biological species concept phylogenetic species concept genetic species concept genus family phylocode 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Avise, J. C., and Johns, G. C. (1999). Proposal for a standardized temporal scheme of biological classification for extant species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 96: 7358–7363.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Avise, J. C., Walker, D., and Johns, G. C. (1998). Speciation durations and Pleistocene effects on vertebrate phylogeography. Proc. R. Sco. Lond.B, 265: 1707–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bearder, S. K., Honess, P. E., and Ambrose, L. (1995). Species diversity among galagos with special reference to mate recognition. In Alterman, L., Izard, M. K., and Doyle, G. A. (eds.), Creatures of the Dark: The Nocturnal Prosimians, Plenum, New York, pp. 331–352.Google Scholar
  4. Bearder, S. K., Honess, P. E., Bayes, M., Ambrose, L., and Anderson, M. (1996). Assessing galago diversity-a call for help. Afr. Primates 2(1): 11–15.Google Scholar
  5. Bradley, R. D., and Baker, R. J. (2001). A test of the genetic species concept: Cytochrome-bsequences and mammals. J. Mamm. 82: 960–973.Google Scholar
  6. Cracraft, J. (1983). Species concepts and speciation analysis. Curr. Ornithol. 1: 159–187.Google Scholar
  7. Cracraft, J. (1997). Species concepts in systematics and conservation biology-an ornithological viewpoint. In Claridge, M. F., Dawah, A. A., and Wilson, M. R. (eds.), Species: The Units of Biodiversity, Chapman and Hall, New York, pp. 325–339.Google Scholar
  8. de Queiroz, K., and Donoghue, M. J. (1988). Phylogenetic systematics and the species problem. Cladistics 4: 317–338.Google Scholar
  9. de Queiroz, K., and Gauthier, J. (1992). Phylogenetic taxonomy. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23: 449–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fooden, J. (1976). Provisional classification and key to living species of macaques (Primates: Macaca). Folia primatol. 25: 225–236.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gebo, D. L., MacLatchy, L., Kityo, R., Deino, A., Kingston, J., and Pilbeam, D. (1997). A Hominoid genus from the early Miocene of Uganda. Science 276: 401–404.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ghiselin, M. T. (1966). On psychologism in the logic of taxonomic controversies. Syst. Zool. 15: 207–215.Google Scholar
  13. Ghiselin, M. T. (1974). A radical solution to the species problem. Syst. Zool. 23: 536–544.Google Scholar
  14. Goodman, M., Porter, C. A., Czelusniak, J., Page, S. L., Schneider, H., Shoshani, J., Gunnell, G., and Groves, C. P. (1998). Toward a phylogenetic classification of primates based on DNA evidence complemented by fossil evidence. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 9: 585–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Groves, C. P. (1986). Systematics of the Great Apes. In Swindler, D. R., and Erwin, J. (eds.), Comparative Primate Biology, Vol.1: Systematics, Evolution, and Anatomy, Alan R. Liss, New York, pp. 187–217.Google Scholar
  16. Groves, C. P. (1989). A Theory of Human and Primate Evolution, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  17. Groves, C. P. (2001a). Primate Taxonomy, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  18. Groves, C. P. (2001b). Why taxonomic stability is a bad idea, or why are there so few species of primates (or are there?). Evol. Anthropol. 10: 192–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harrison, R. G. (1998). Linking evolutionary patterns and processes: The relevance of species concepts for the study of speciation. In Howard, D. J., and Berlocher, S. H. (eds.), Endless Forms: Species and Speciation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
  20. Hayasaka, K., Fuji, K., and Horai, S. (1996). Molecular phylogeny of macaques: Implications of nucleotide sequences from an 896-base pair region of mitochondrial DNA. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13: 1044–1053.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hennig, W. (1966). Phylogenetic Systematics, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  22. Mayden, R. L. (1997). A hierarchy of species concepts: The denouement in the saga of the species problem. In Claridge, M. F., Dawah, H. A., and Wilson, M. R. (eds.), Species: The Units of Biodiversity, Chapman and Hall, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Mayr, E. (1940). Speciation phenomena in birds. Am. Nat. 74: 249–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayr, E. (1942). Systematics and the Origin of Species, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Mayr, E. (1963). Animal Species and Evolution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  26. Nixon, K. C., and Carpenter, J. M. (2000). On the other "phylogenetic systematics." Cladistics 16: 298–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paterson, H. E. (1978). More evidence against speciation by reinforcement. S. Afr. J. Sci. 14: 369–371.Google Scholar
  28. Paterson, H. E. (1985). The recognition concept of species. In Vrba, E. S. (ed.), Species and Speciation, Transvaal Museum, Pretoria, South Africa (Monograph No. 4), xviii C 176 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Rylands, A. B., Schneider, H., Langguth, A., Mittermeier, R. A. Groves, C. P., and Rodríguez-Luna, E. (2000). An assessment of the diversity of New World primates. Neotrop. Primates 8: 61–93.Google Scholar
  30. Simpson, G. G. (1961). Principles of Animal Taxonomy, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  31. Templeton, A. R. (1989). The meaning of species and speciation: A genetic perspective. In Otte, D., and Endler, J. A. (eds.), Speciation and its Consequences, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
  32. Tosi, A. J., Morales, J. C., and Melnick, D. J. (2000). Comparison of Ychromosome and mtDNA phylogenies leads to unique inferences of macaque evolutionary history. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 17: 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Roosmalen, M. G. M., van Roosmalen, T., Mittermeier, R. A., and Rylands, A. B. (2000). Two new species of marmosets, genus CallithrixErxleben, 1777 (Callitrichidae, Primates), from the Tapajós/Madeira interfluvium, South Central Amazonia, Brazil. Neotrop. Pri-mates 8: 2–18.Google Scholar
  34. Van Valen, L. (1976). Ecological species, multispecies, and oaks. Taxon 25: 233–239.Google Scholar
  35. Verheyen, W. N. (1962). —Contribution ` a la craniologie comparée des Primates: les genres ColobusIlliger 1811 et CercopithecusLinnaeus 1758. Ann. K. Mus. Midden-Afrika, Zool. Wet. 105, ix C 255 pp.Google Scholar
  36. Wood, B., and M. Collard (1999). The human genus. Science 284: 65–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Colin Groves
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Archaeology & AnthropologyAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations