Linnaean taxonomy
# the particular form of
biological classification (taxonomy) of
Carl Linnaeus, as set forth in his
Systema Naturæ (1735) and subsequent works. In the
taxonomy of Linnaeus there are three kingdoms, divided into
classes, and they, in turn, into
orders,
families,
genera (singular:
genus), and
species (singular:
species), with an additional rank lower than species.
# a term for rank-based classification of organisms, in general. That is, taxonomy in the traditional sense of the word: rank-based
scientific classification. This term is especially used as opposed to
cladistic systematics, which groups organisms into
clades. It is attributed to Linnaeus, although he neither invented the concept of ranked classification (it goes back to
Plato and
Aristotle) nor gave it its present form. In fact, it does not have an exact present form, as "Linnaean taxonomy" as such does not really exist: it is a collective (abstracting) term for what actually are several separate fields, which use similar approaches.
The same applies to "Linnaean name": depending on the context this may either be a formal name given by Linnaeus (personally), such as Giraffa camelopardalis Linnaeus, 1758, or a formal name in the accepted nomenclature (as opposed to a modernistic clade name).
The taxonomy of Linnaeus
In his
Imperium Naturae, Linnaeus established three kingdoms, namely
Regnum Animale,
Regnum Vegetabile and
Regnum Lapideum. This approach, the Animal, Vegetable and Mineral Kingdoms, survives today in the popular mind, notably in the form of the parlour game question: "Is it
animal, vegetable or mineral?". The work of Linnaeus had a huge impact on science; it was indispensable as a foundation for
biological nomenclature, now regulated by the
Nomenclature Codes. Two of his works, the first edition of the
Species Plantarum (1753) for plants and the tenth edition of the
Systema Naturae (1758), are accepted as among the starting points of nomenclature; his binomials (names for species) and his generic names take priority over those of others. However, the impact he had on science was not because of the value of his taxonomy.
For animals
Only in the Animal Kingdom is the higher taxonomy of Linnaeus still more or less recognizable and some of these names are still in use, but usually not quite for the same groups as used by Linnaeus. He divided the Animal Kingdom into six classes, in the tenth edition, of 1758, these were:
Classis 1. Mammalia
Classis 2. Aves
Classis 3. Amphibia
Classis 4. Pisces
Classis 5. Insecta
Classis 6. Vermes
For plants
His orders and classes of plants, according to his
Systema Sexuale, were never intended to represent natural groups (as opposed to his
ordines naturales in his
Philosophia Botanica) but only for use in identification. They were used in that sense well into the nineteenth century.
The Linnaean classes for plants, in the Sexual System, were:
Classis 1. Monandria
Classis 2. Diandria
Classis 3. Triandria
Classis 4. Tetrandria
Classis 5. Pentandria
Classis 6. Hexandria
Classis 7. Heptandria
Classis 8. Octandria
Classis 9. Enneandria
Classis 10. Decandria
Classis 11. Dodecandria
Classis 12. Icosandria
Classis 13. Polyandria
Classis 14. Didynamia
Classis 15. Tetradynamia
Classis 16. Monadelphia
Classis 17. Diadelphia
Classis 18. Polyadelphia
Classis 19. Syngenesia
Classis 20. Gynandria
Classis 21. Monoecia
Classis 22. Dioecia
Classis 23. Polygamia
Classis 24. Cryptogamia
For minerals
His taxonomy of
minerals has dropped long since from use. In the tenth edition, 1758, of the
Systema Naturæ, the Linnaean classes were:
Classis 1. Petræ
Classis 2. Mineræ
Classis 3. Fossilia
Classis 4. Vitamentra
:P
Rank-based scientific classification
This rank-based method of classifying living organisms was originally popularized by (and much later named for) Linnaeus, although it has changed considerably since his time. The greatest innovation of Linnaeus, and still the most important aspect of this system, is the general use of binomial nomenclature, the combination of a genus name and a second term, which together uniquely identify each species of organism. For example, the human species is uniquely identified by the name Homo sapiens. No other species of organism can have this same binomen (the technical term for a binomial in the case of animals). Prior to Linnaean taxonomy, animals were classified according to their mode of movement.
A strength of Linnaean taxonomy is that it can be used to organize the different kinds of living organisms, simply and practically. Every species can be given a unique (and, one hopes, stable) name, as compared with common names that are often neither unique nor consistent from place to place and language to language. This uniqueness and stability are, of course, a result of the acceptance by working systematists (biologists specializing in taxonomy), not merely of the binomial names themselves, but of the rules governing the use of these names, which are laid down in formal Nomenclature Codes.
Species can be placed in a ranked hierarchy, starting with either domains or kingdoms. Domains are divided into kingdoms. Kingdoms are divided into phyla (singular: phylum) — for animals; the term division, used for plants and fungi, is equivalent to the rank of phylum (and the current International Code of Botanical Nomenclature allows the use of either term). Phyla (or divisions) are divided into classes, and they, in turn, into orders, families, genera (singular: genus), and species (singular: species). There are ranks below species: in zoology, subspecies (but see form or morph); in botany, variety (varietas) and form (forma), etc.
Groups of organisms at any of these ranks are called taxa (singular: taxon) or taxonomic groups.
The Linnaean system has proven robust and it remains the only extant working classification system at present that enjoys universal scientific acceptance. However, although the number of ranks is unlimited, in practice any classification becomes more cumbersome the more ranks are added. Among the later subdivisions that have arisen are such entities as phyla, families, and tribes, as well as any number of ranks with prefixes (superfamilies, subfamilies, etc.). The use of newer taxonomic tools such as cladistics and phylogenetic nomenclature has led to a different way of looking at evolution (expressed in many nested clades) and this sometimes leads to a desire for more ranks.
The alternative
Over time, the understanding of the relationships between living things has changed. Linnaeus could only base his scheme on the structural similarities of the different organisms. The greatest change was the widespread acceptance of
evolution as the mechanism of biological diversity and species formation, following the 1859 publication of Charles Darwin's
On the Origin of Species. It then became generally understood that classifications ought to reflect the
phylogeny of organisms, their descent by evolution. This led to
evolutionary taxonomy, where the various
extant and
extinct are linked together to construct a phylogeny. This is largely what is meant by the term 'Linnaean taxonomy' when used in a modern context.
In cladistics, originating in the work of Willi Hennig, 1950 onwards, each taxon is grouped so as to include the common ancestor of the group's members (and thus to avoid polyphyly). Such taxa may be either monophyletic (including all descendants) such as genus Homo, or paraphyletic (excluding some descendants), such as genus Australopithecus.
Originally, Linnaeus established three kingdoms in his scheme, namely for Plants, Animals and an additional group for minerals, which has long since been abandoned. Since then, various life forms have been moved into three new kingdoms: Monera, for prokaryotes (i.e., bacteria); Protista, for protozoans and most algae; and Fungi. This five kingdom scheme is still far from the phylogenetic ideal and has largely been supplanted in modern taxonomic work by a division into three domains: Bacteria and Archaea, which contain the prokaryotes, and Eukaryota, comprising the remaining forms. These arrangements should not be seen as definitive. They are based on the genomes of the organisms; as knowledge on this increases, so will classifications change.
Representing presumptive evolutionary relationships, especially given the wide acceptance of cladistic methodology and numerous molecular phylogenies that have challenged long-accepted classifications, within the framework of Linnaean taxonomy, is sometimes seen as problematic. Therefore, some systematists have proposed a PhyloCode to replace it.
See also
Evolutionary tree — a way to express insights into evolutionary relationships
History of plant systematics
Zoology mnemonic for a list of mnemonic sentences used to help people remember the list of Linnaean ranks.
== Further reading ==
Dawkins, Richard. 2004. The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Life. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-618-00583-8
Ereshefsky, Marc. 2000. The Poverty of the Linnaean Hierarchy: A Philosophical Study of Biological Taxonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gould, Stephen Jay. 1989. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. W. W. Norton & Co. ISBN 0-393-02705-8
Pavord, Anna. The Naming of Names: The Search for Order in the World of Plants. Bloomsbury. ISBN 0-747-57052-0
External links
Wikispecies
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Saint Louis Code), Electronic version
ICZN website, for zoological nomenclature
Text of the ICZN, Electronic version
ZooBank: The World Register of Animal Names
International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes for bacteria
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 4th Edition. By the International Union of Biological Sciences
ICTVdB website, for virus nomenclature by the International Union of Microbiological Societies
Tree of Life
European Species Names in Linnaean, Czech, English, German and French
Taxonomy
Category:Scientific classification
Category:Classification systems
Category:Biological nomenclature
Category:Botanical nomenclature
Category:Zoological nomenclature
