Linnaeus and Clasification

We lead

10-1
 Linnaeus and Taxonomy
We lead

• More than 1.5 million species of animals are named

– Estimated that these account for
• Less than 20% of all extant animals
• Less than 1% of extinct animals
• Taxonomy
– Formal system for naming and classifying species
• Systematics
– Broader science of classifying organisms based on similarity,
biogeography, etc.
– Systematic zoologists have three goals
• To discover all species of animals
• To reconstruct their evolutionary relationships
• To classify animals according to their evolutionary relationships

10-2
 Linnaeus and Taxonomy
We lead

• Greek philosopher Aristotle first classified organisms

• Carolus Linnaeus designed the current system of
classification
– Swedish botanist with extensive experience classifying
objects, especially flowers
– Used morphology to develop a classification system of
animals and plants
• Published in his work, Systema Naturae
– Divided animal kingdom into species and gave each a
distinctive name
• Grouped species into genera, genera into orders, and orders into
classes
– His classification scheme has been drastically altered, but
the basic principle is still followed

10-3
 Linnaeus and Taxonomy
We lead

• Hierarchy of taxonomic ranks now includes 7 major

groups
– Kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and
species
• All animals are placed in Kingdom Animalia
• Names of animal groups at each rank in the hierarchy
are called taxa (taxon)
– Each rank can be subdivided into additional levels
of taxa
• Superclass, suborder, etc.

10-4
We lead

10-5
 Linnaeus and Taxonomy
We lead

• A scientific name of an animal consists of two words

(binomial nomenclature)
– First word is the genus and is capitalized
– Second is the specific epithet written in lower case
• Scientific name should be printed in italics or
underlined if handwritten
– Homo sapiens
• Genus name
– Always a noun
– Names of genera must refer only to a single group of
organisms

10-6
 Linnaeus and Taxonomy
We lead

• Species epithet
– Usually an adjective that must agree in gender with the
species
– Never used alone
• A specific epithet may be used in different genera
– Sita carolinensis (white-breasted nuthatch)
– Poecile carolinensis (Carolina chickadee)
• Ranks above species are single names written with a
capital initial letter
– Reptilia and Cnidaria

10-7
 Linnaeus and Taxonomy
We lead

• Geographic subspecies are trinomials

– All three terms are in italics
– Subspecies is in lower case
• A polytypic species contains
– One subspecies whose subspecific name is a repetition of
the species epithet
– One or more additional subspecies whose names differ.

10-8
 We lead

• New species and other taxa of insects (and

other organisms) are named according to a set
of rules developed by international agreement
and revised as practices and technologies
change. For all animals, the International Code
of Zoological Nomenclature regulates names
in the species, genus, and family groups.
 We lead

• The standard use of a unique binomen (two

names) for each species ensures that people
everywhere can communicate clearly. Unique
and universal names for taxa result from
making new names available through
permanent publication with the appropriate
designation of type specimens (that serve as
the reference for names), and by recognizing
the priority of names (i.e. the oldest available
name is the valid name of a taxon).
 We lead

• Today much controversy is centered upon

what constitutes a “published” work for the
purposes of nomenclature, principally due to
the difficulty of ensuring permanence and
long-term accessibility of electronic
publications.
 We lead

• When a new insect species is recognized and a

new name published, it must be accompanied
by a published description of the appropriate
life stages (almost always including the adult)
in sufficient detail that the species can be
distinguished from its close relatives.
 We lead

• Features diagnostic of the new species must be

explained and any variations in appearance or habits
described or discussed.
• Sometimes diagnostic nucleotide sequences will be
available for one or more genes of the new species
and these can be deposited in online databases, such
as GenBank.
• Indeed, comparison of sequences from a number of
related specimens and populations often lead to the
recognition of new species that were previously
“cryptic” due to similar morphology.
 We lead

• Species delimitation remains one of the challenging

tasks of taxonomy and new character systems are
being explored in many insect groups
• Despite taxonomic problems at the species and
genus levels due to immense insect diversity and
phylogenetic controversies at all taxonomic levels, we
are moving towards a consensus view on many of the
internal relationships of Insecta and their wider
grouping, the Hexapoda.
 Invertebrate Classification and
Relationships We lead

• Classification by cell number, embryology, and

body symmetry
• Classification by developmental pattern 
• Classification by evolutionary relationship 
– Methods used in deducing evolutionary
relationships
• Classification by habitat and lifestyle
Classification by Cell Number and Body
Symmetry We lead

• Cell Number 
Metazoans
Unicellular
• Body Symmetry
– Asymmetrical

– Bilateral

Radial
Classification by Developmental Pattern
We lead

• Multicellular animals have been divided into

two groups based on the number of germ
layers
– Germ layer
• Diploblastic
– Ectoderm
– Endoderm
• Triploblastic
 

– Mesoderm Most metazoans are triploblastic

Classification by Developmental Pattern
We lead

• Triploblastic animals can be classified even

further
Pseudocoelomate
Acoelomate

Coelomate
 Different Developmental Types
We lead

Triploblastic

Acoelomate Pseudocoelomate Coelomate

Protostomes Deuterostomes
Summary of the development characteristics of idealized
protostomous and deuterostomous coelomates We lead

Developmental Characteristic Protostomes Deuterostomes

     

Mouth origin From blastopore Never from blastopore

     

Coelom formation Schizocoely Enterocoely

     

Arrangement of coelomic Variable in number Generally in 3 pairs

 
cavities  
 
 
 

Mesoderm origin 4d cell Other

     

Cleavage pattern Spiral, determinate Radial, indeterminate

     

Polar-lobe formation Present in some species Not present in any species

     

Larval ciliary bands Compound cilia from Simple cilia, one cilium per cell
  multiciliated cells  

 
   
Downstream particle capture  
Upstream particle capture
 Advantages of the Coelom
We lead

• The digestive system is independent of the

body wall and locomotor activities.
• Room for the gut, gonads, and embryo’s to
bulge.
• Fluid in coelom can distribute oxygen,
nutrients and hormones through the body.
• Fluid filled coelom leads to more effective
locomotory systems.
Classification by Evolutionary Relationship
We lead

• By far the most familiar classification scheme

is the taxonomic framework established about
250 years ago (1758) by Carolus Linnaeus.

Kingdom Family
Phylum Genus
Binomial nomenclature
Class Species
Order
 We lead

• The members of any given taxon show a high

degree of similarity—morphological,
developmental, biochemical, genetic, and
sometimes behavioral.
—and are presumed to be more closely
related to each other than to the members of
any other taxon at the same taxonomic level.
 We lead

• An ideal taxonomic classification scheme

reflects degrees of phylogenetic
relatedness;
– that is, all members of a given taxonomic
group should have descended from a single
ancestral species and thus be more closely
related to each other than to the members of
any other group.
 We lead

Logical, reasoned guesses about the origins

of various animal groups have been based
upon:
 

– studies of developmental patterns,

– studies of morphological characteristics
– biochemical characteristics
– careful examination of animals preserved in
the fossil record.
 Molecular Systematics
We lead

• Comparative molecular analyses of protein

structure and of DNA and ribosomal RNA
sequences among species are altering some of
these views substantially.
 We lead

• The invertebrates form a paraphyletic

group, since their vertebrate
descendants are excluded
• Paraphyletic grouping: a group of species
sharing an immediate ancestor but not
including all descendants of that ancestor
 Invertebrate diversity as reflected at the
phylum level We lead

Invertebrate animals are presently

distributed among at least 23 phyla
each representing a unique body
plan; as many as 41 phyla

• Pechenik (2010) – 41 phyla but

discussed 32

• Barnes (1998) – 38 phyla

We lead
 We lead

• Note that the percentage of species contained within

own phylum—the phylum Chordata—is quite small
(only about 5% of all described species) and that this
phylum contains some invertebrates as well as
vertebrates.
• No new phylum-level body plans have arisen in the
past 600 million years
• About 251 million years ago at the Permian-Triassic
boundary, in the most devastating extinction event to
date, nearly 95% of existing species-level animal
diversity was lost
 We lead

• In the subsequent 250 million years, many

new species evolved, often representing new
orders and classes, but no new phylum-level
body plans appeared.
• The category of species has additional
biological significance.
• Theoretically, the members of one species are
reproductively isolated from members of all
other species.
 We lead

• The species, therefore, forms a pool of genetic

material that only members of that species have
access to and that is isolated from the gene pool of
all other species.
• Deducing Evolutionary Relationships
“…..it is clear that a number of key ideas about
metazoan phylogeny and body plan evolution will need
to be reconsidered, and that at least some traditional
views may require major modification.” T. Lacalli,
1997. Invertebrate Biology 116:363—70.
 We lead

An ideal taxonomic
classification scheme reflects
degrees of phylogenetic
relatedness; that is, all
members of a given taxonomic
group should have descended
from a single ancestral species
and thus be more closely
related to each other than to
the members of any other
group.
 We lead

• In the evolutionary process, structures sometimes

become less complex rather than more complex.
• Until very recently, evolutionary relationships
have been deduced entirely through anatomical
and ultra-structural studies, with phenotypes
serving as reflections of the underlying
genotypes.
• During the past 10 years or so, however,
biochemical and molecular studies have allowed
us to examine genotypic diversity directly.
 We lead

• The oldest animal classification schemes

• assume that all multicellular animals descended
from some form of single-celled protist, most
likely a colonial flagellate
• view sponges (phylum Porifera) as the earliest
experiments in multicellularity with no close
relationship to any other existing phyla
We lead
 We lead

A recent scheme portrays many different

early metazoans as independently evolved
from many different protozoan ancestors and
many more advanced animals as
independently evolved from many different
flatworm ancestors.
 Classification by Habitat and Lifestyle
We lead

• Terrestrial,
  marine, or aquatic
• Intertidal
  or subtidal
• Mobile,
  sessile, or sedentary, planktonic
Herbivores, carnivores, suspension feeders,
deposit feeders, filter feeders
Symbiotic associations
Ectosymbionts
Endosymbionts
Mutualism, commensalism, parasitism
 Classification We lead

• The 5 Kingdoms we use today.

– Monera: single celled, prokaryote organisms
• Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae)
– Protista: single celled, contains nucleus and
internal subdivisions
• Diatoms, dinoflagellates, and protozoans
– Fungi: multicellular, no photosynthesis, nutrition
by absorption
• Mushrooms
– Plantae: multicellular, autotrophs
– Animalia: multicellular, heterotrophs
We lead
Thank you