Monofilia: diferenças entre revisões
Conteúdo apagado Conteúdo adicionado
m ← feito redirecionamento para Monofilético |
Etiqueta: Inserção de predefinição obsoleta |
||
Linha 1:
{{See also|Grupo coroa}}
[[File:Clade-grade II.png|thumb|300px|[[Árvore filogenética]]: os grupos a azul (esquerda) e vermelho (direita) são [[táxon]]s monofiléticos; o grupo a verde (centro) é [[Parafilia|parafilético]].]]
[[Ficheiro:Monophyly, paraphyly, polyphyly.png|thumb|300px|[[Cladograma]] dos [[primata]]s, mostrando um '''grupo monofilético''' (os [[símio]]s, a amarelo), um '''grupo parafilético''' (os [[prossímio]]s, a azul, incluindo o subgrupo representado avermelho), e um '''grupo polifilético''' (os primatas com actividade nocturna, os [[loris]]es e os ''[[Tarsius]]'', a vermelho.)]]
[[File:Phylogenetic-Groups.svg|thumbnail|300px|Grupos filogenéticos:<br>
(1) '''Monofilia''': um ''taxon'' monofilético contém um [[ancestral comum]] e todos os seus descententes (a amarelo, o grupo dos "répteis e aves"); (2) '''Parafilia''': um ''taxon'' parafilético contém o seu mais recente ancestral comum, mas não contém todos os descendentes desse ancestral (a azul, os [[répteis]]); e (3) '''Polifilia''': um ''taxon'' polifilético não não contém o mais recente ancestral comum de todos os seus membros (a vermelho, o grupo de [[Homeotermia|todos os animais de sangue quente]] é [[Polifilia|polifilético]]).]]
'''Monofilia''' é a propriedade apresentada por um agrupamento taxonómico (um ''[[taxon]]'' ou [[conjunto]] de organismos) que contenha entre os seus [[Elemento (matemática)|elementos]] todos e apenas os descendentes de um ''[[ancestral comum]]''. Um conjunto de organismos que satisfaça a condição de monofilia é um [[agrupamento monofilético]], o que na moderna [[cladística]] corresponde a um [[táxon]] (grupo de organismos) que forma uma [[clade]], ou seja, que consiste exclusivamente numa [[espécie]] ancestral e todos os seus descendentes. Em consequência da partilha do [[património genético]] do ancestral comum, os membros de um grupo monofilético caracterizam-se por partilharem [[Apomorfia|características derivadas]] comuns, as [[sinapomorfia]]s. «Monofilia» é sinónimo de «[[holofilia]]», termo entretanto caído em desuso.<ref name="aub2015" /><ref name=Colless1972>{{Cite journal
| last1 = Colless | first1 = Donald H.
|date=March 1972
| title = Monophyly
| journal = Systematic Zoology
| volume = 21
| issue = 1
| pages = 126–128
| doi = 10.2307/2412266
| publisher = Society of Systematic Biologists
| postscript = <!--None-->
| jstor=2412266
}}</ref><ref name='Envall2007'>{{cite journal
| doi = 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.00984.x
| title = On the difference between mono-, holo-, and paraphyletic groups: a consistent distinction of process and pattern
| year = 2008
| author = Envall, Mats
| journal = Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
| volume = 94
| pages = 217 }}</ref><ref name='Ashlock1971'>{{Cite journal
| last = Ashlock | first = Peter D.
|date=March 1971
| title = Monophyly and Associated Terms
| journal = Systematic Zoology
| volume = 20
| issue = 1
| pages = 63–69
| doi = 10.2307/2412223
| publisher = Society of Systematic Biologists
| postscript = <!--None-->
| jstor=2412223
}}</ref>
<!------------------------
==Descrição==
Monophyly is contrasted with [[paraphyly]] and [[polyphyly]], as shown in the second diagram. A ''paraphyletic'' group consists of all of the descendants of a common ancestor ''minus'' one or more monophyletic groups. Thus, a paraphyletic group is 'nearly' monophyletic (hence the prefix 'para', meaning 'near' or 'alongside'.) A ''polyphyletic'' group is characterized by [[Convergent evolution|convergent]] features or habits (for example, night-active primates, fruit trees, aquatic insects); the features by which the group is differentiated from others are not inherited from a common ancestor.
These definitions have taken some time to be accepted. When the cladistic school of thought became mainstream in the 1960s, several alternative definitions were in use. Indeed, taxonomists sometimes used terms without defining them, leading to confusion in the early literature,<ref name="Hennig1966">{{cite book | last=Hennig|first=Willi|first2=D. (Translator)|last2=Davis|first3=R. (Translator)|last3=Zangerl|title=Phylogenetic Systematics|year=1999|origyear=1966|publisher=Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois|edition=Illinois Reissue|pages=72–77 | isbn=0-252-06814-9}}</ref> a confusion which persists.<ref name="aub2015">Aubert, D. 2015. A formal analysis of phylogenetic terminology: Towards a reconsideration of the current paradigm in systematics. ''Phytoneuron'' '''2015-66''':1–54.</ref>
==Definitions==
On the broadest scale, definitions fall into two groups.
* [[Willi Hennig]] (1966:148) defined monophyly as groups based on [[synapomorphy]] (in contrast to paraphyletic groups, based on [[symplesiomorphy]], and polyphyletic groups, based on [[convergent evolution|convergence]]). Some authors have sought to define monophyly to include paraphyly as any two or more groups sharing a common ancestor.<ref name="aub2015" /><ref name=Colless1972>{{Cite journal
| last1 = Colless | first1 = Donald H.
|date=March 1972
| title = Monophyly
| journal = Systematic Zoology
| volume = 21
| issue = 1
| pages = 126–128
| doi = 10.2307/2412266
| publisher = Society of Systematic Biologists
| postscript = <!--None-->
| jstor=2412266
}}</ref><ref name='Envall2007'>{{cite journal
| doi = 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.00984.x
| title = On the difference between mono-, holo-, and paraphyletic groups: a consistent distinction of process and pattern
| year = 2008
| author = Envall, Mats
| journal = Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
| volume = 94
| pages = 217 }}</ref><ref name='Ashlock1971'>{{Cite journal
| last = Ashlock | first = Peter D.
|date=March 1971
| title = Monophyly and Associated Terms
| journal = Systematic Zoology
| volume = 20
| issue = 1
| pages = 63–69
| doi = 10.2307/2412223
| publisher = Society of Systematic Biologists
| postscript = <!--None-->
| jstor=2412223
}}</ref> However, this broader definition encompasses both monophyletic and paraphyletic groups as defined above. Therefore, most scientists today restrict the term "monophyletic" to refer to groups consisting of all the descendants of one (hypothetical) common ancestor.<ref name="Hennig1966"/> However, when considering taxonomic groups such as genera and species, the most appropriate nature of their common ancestor is unclear. Assuming that it would be one individual or mating pair is unrealistic for sexually reproducing species, which are by definition interbreeding populations.<ref name=Simpson1961>{{cite book | last = Simpson | first = George | title = Principles of Animal Taxonomy | publisher = Columbia University Press | location = New York | year = 1961 | isbn = 0-231-02427-4 }}</ref>
* Monophyly and associated terms are restricted to discussions of taxa, and are not necessarily accurate when used to describe what Hennig called tokogenetic relationships—now referred to as genealogies. Some argue that using a broader definition, such as a species and all its descendants, does not really work to define a genus.<ref name=Simpson1961/> According to D. M. Stamos, a satisfactory cladistic definition of a species or genus is impossible because many species (and even genera) may form by "budding" from an existing species, leaving the parent species paraphyletic; or the species or genera may be the result of [[hybrid speciation]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Stamos|first=D.N.|title=The species problem : biological species, ontology, and the metaphysics of biology|year=2003|publisher=Lexington Books|location=Lanham, Md. [u.a.]|isbn=0739105035|pages=261–268|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jPAjv5FsKMYC&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=defining+species+cladistically'&source=bl&ots=JAR0SfYZFh&sig=C0KyC4IvpYgCNlEeqhyRWiIVeCA&hl=no&sa=X&ei=z37vUZj2OITptQad04CgCQ&ved=0CFcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=defining%20species%20cladistically'&f=false}}</ref>
----------->
==Referências==
{{reflist|2}}
=={{Ver também}}==
* [[Clade]]
* [[Parafilia]]
* [[Polifilia]]
* [[Grupo coroa]]
=={{Links}}==
*{{cite web|first=Darren|last=Abbey|year=1994–2006|title=Graphical explanation of basic phylogenetic terms|url=http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/glossary/gloss1/phyly.html|publisher=University of California, Berkeley|accessdate=15 January 2010}}
*{{cite web|first=Steven M.|last=Carr|year=2002|title=Concepts of monophyly, polyphyly & paraphyly|url=http://www.mun.ca/biology/scarr/Taxon_types.htm|publisher=Memorial University|accessdate=15 January 2010}}
*{{cite web|first=Jaako|last=Hyvönen|year=2005|title=Monophyly, consensus, compromise|url=http://www.helsinki.fi/~jhyvonen/ec05/05_11.11.pdf|format=pdf|publisher=University of Helsinki|accessdate=15 January 2010}}
{{Filogenética}}
[[Categoria:Filogenética]]
| |||