Reading Trees

Copyright © 2014 Magnolia Press. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0. The attached file is the published version of the articl

Quantifying Phytogeographical Regions of Australia Using Geospatial Turnover in Species Composition

The largest digitized dataset of land plant distributions in Australia assembled to date (750,741 georeferenced herbarium records; 6,043 species) was used to partition the Australian continent into phytogeographical regions. We used a set of six widely distributed vascular plant groups and three non-vascular plant groups which together occur in a variety of landscapes/habitats across Australia. Phytogeographical regions were identified using quantitative analyses of species turnover, the rate of change in species composition between sites, calculated as Simpson's beta. We propose six major phytogeographical regions for Australia: Northern, Northern Desert, Eremaean, Eastern Queensland, Euronotian and South-Western. Our new phytogeographical regions show a spatial agreement of 65% with respect to previously defined phytogeographical regions of Australia. We also confirm that these new regions are in general agreement with the biomes of Australia and other contemporary biogeographical classifications. To assess the meaningfulness of the proposed phytogeographical regions, we evaluated how they relate to broad scale environmental gradients. Physiographic factors such as geology do not have a strong correspondence with our proposed regions. Instead, we identified climate as the main environmental driver. The use of an unprecedentedly large dataset of multiple plant groups, coupled with an explicit quantitative analysis, makes this study novel and allows an improved historical bioregionalization scheme for Australian plants. Our analyses show that: (1) there is considerable overlap between our results and older biogeographic classifications; (2) phytogeographical regions based on species turnover can be a powerful tool to further partition the landscape into meaningful units; (3) further studies using phylogenetic turnover metrics are needed to test the taxonomic areas

<strong>The bioregionalisation revival</strong>

Ebach, Malte C. (2013): The bioregionalisation revival. Zootaxa 3635 (3): 269-274, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3635.3.

La matrice de données

La matrice de données peut être interprétée de trois manières différentes en systématique et biogéographie, baptisées ici phylo-phénétique, systématique phylogénétique (transformationnelle) et Cladistique. Chacune de ces interprétations considère la matrice comme une combinaison de lignes (taxons, aires et caractères) et de cellules (états de caractère), exprimés sous forme de tableau. Toutes les méthodes habituelles, sauf la Cladistique, utilisent les transformations ou les changements entre les cellules comme source pour la découverte et la représentation des relations de parenté. Nous montrons que la Cladistique, en revanche, utilise les relations entre trois cellules comme l’unité élémentaire de relation. Nous suggérons que la différence entre ces trois méthodes se trouve dans la théorie et la pratique concernant les notions d’homologue et d’homologie. Nous montrons ici que, dans les deux premières interprétations citées, la matrice est simplement un outil phénétique destiné à optimiser des arrangements d’homologues plutôt qu’à déterminer des homologies et à découvrir des relations de parenté.The data matrix can be generally viewed in three different ways for systematics and biogeography, which we refer to as phylo-phenetics, phylogenetic systematics (transformational) and Cladistic. Each views the matrix as a combination of manipulating points (taxa, areas and characters) and cells (character states), expressed in a table. All current methods, except Cladistics, treat the transformations or switches between cells and points as the basis for discovering and expressing relationships. We consider that Cladistics, however, treats a relationship between three cells, or points, as the smallest unit. We suggest that the difference between all three methods lies in the theory and application of the terms homologue and homology. It is shown that for most methods the data matrix is simply a phenetic device for optimising homologues rather than determining homologies and discovering relationships.</p

Brachymetopus (Brachymetopus) ararat Engel & Morris 1992

&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;ararat&lt;/i&gt; Engel &amp; Morris 1992 &lt;p&gt; 1992 &lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;maccoyi ararat&lt;/i&gt; Engel &amp; Morris; p. 80&ndash;82, pl. 2, figs. 1&ndash;7, text-figs. 5&ndash;7.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Holotype.&lt;/b&gt; AMF84320a (external mould of partial cephalon).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Paratype material.&lt;/b&gt; From NU L375: AMF84320b (internal cephalon), AMF84321a/b (external/internal cephalon), AMF84322a/b (external/internal pygidium), AMF84323 (external pygidium), AMF84324 (internal pygidium), AMF84325 (internal cephalon and pygidium), AMF84326 (external cephalon). From NU L740: AMF84327 (external cephalon), AMF84328 (external cephalon), AMF84329 (external pygidium), AMF84330 (internal pygidium), AMF84331 (external pygidium).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Locality.&lt;/b&gt; Type&mdash;NU L375. Other&mdash;NU L740.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Emended diagnosis.&lt;/b&gt; Cephalic and glabellar shape slightly triangular anteriorly; glabella under half cephalic length; eye length almost half glabellar length; cephalon inflated, preglabellar field steep (50&ndash;60&deg;); strong flattened nodular ornament, tending to become obsolete on the occipital ring and posterior border; two large nodes in front of the eyes appear to constrict the glabella; single row of nodes around inner margin of the cephalic border. Pygidium with 11&ndash;15 axial rings, 7&ndash;8 pleural ribs; posterior ribs not incurved.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Remarks.&lt;/b&gt; The above diagnosis has been emended from Engel &amp; Morris (1992) to remove some of the descriptive text of the nodular ornament. &lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;ararat&lt;/i&gt; is diagnosed as a separate species from &lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;maccoyi&lt;/i&gt; as it has a slightly triangular cephalon and two distinct nodes above the eyes, smaller eyes and sparser ornament.&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Vanderlaan, Tegan A. &amp; Ebach, Malte C., 2015, A review of the Carboniferous and Permian trilobites of Australia, pp. 1-56 in Zootaxa 3926 (1)&lt;/i&gt; on pages 13-14, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3926.1.1, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/288002"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/288002&lt;/a&gt

Brachymetopus (Brachymetopus) medinodulosus Engel & Morris 1992

&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;medinodulosus&lt;/i&gt; Engel &amp; Morris 1992 &lt;p&gt; 1992 &lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;maccoyi medinodulosus&lt;/i&gt; Engel &amp; Morris; p. 82&ndash;84, pl. 2, figs. 8&ndash;15, text-figs. 8&ndash;10.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Holotype.&lt;/b&gt; AMF84332 (external mould of cephalon).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Paratype material.&lt;/b&gt; AMF84333a/b (external/internal cephalon), AMF84334 (external cephalon), AMF84335 (external pygidium), AMF84336 (external pygidium), AMF84337 (external pygidium), AMF84338 (external pygidium), AMF84339 (external pygidium), AMF84340 (internal pygidium), AMF84341 (internal pygidium).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Locality.&lt;/b&gt; NU L890.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Diagnosis.&lt;/b&gt; See Engel &amp; Morris (1992: 82).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Remarks.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;medinodulosus&lt;/i&gt; can be defined as a separate species from &lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Brachymetopus&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;maccoyi&lt;/i&gt; based on a finer, sparser cephalic ornament, the lack of a smooth band inside the cephalic border, and a difference in axial ring and pleural rib numbers.&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Vanderlaan, Tegan A. &amp; Ebach, Malte C., 2015, A review of the Carboniferous and Permian trilobites of Australia, pp. 1-56 in Zootaxa 3926 (1)&lt;/i&gt; on page 13, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3926.1.1, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/288002"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/288002&lt;/a&gt

Bollandia Reed 1943

Genus &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt; Reed 1943 &lt;p&gt; 1943 &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt; Reed, p. 62&ndash;63.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; 1971 &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt;; Hahn &amp; Hahn, p. 114&ndash;115. 1984 &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt;; Hahn &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt;, p. 67.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; 1996 &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Capricornia&lt;/i&gt;) Engel &amp; Morris, p. 125. 2009 &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Engelomorrisia&lt;/i&gt;) &Ouml;zdikman, p. 160.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Type species.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Asaphus globiceps&lt;/i&gt; Phillips 1836.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Diagnosis.&lt;/b&gt; See Engel &amp; Morris (1996: 125; taken from Hahn &amp; Hahn 1971 and Hahn &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 1984).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Remarks.&lt;/b&gt; The monotypic subgenus &lt;i&gt;Capricornia&lt;/i&gt; was erected by Engel &amp; Morris (1996). &Ouml;zdikman (2009) stated that &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Capricornia&lt;/i&gt;) is a junior homonym of &lt;i&gt;Capricornia&lt;/i&gt; Obraztsov 1960, and proposed a new subgenus name &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Engelomorrisia&lt;/i&gt;) (&Ouml;zdikman 2009). However, we believe that the defining characteristics of this monotypic subgenus (type species, &lt;i&gt;B.&lt;/i&gt; (&lt;i&gt;Capricornia&lt;/i&gt;) &lt;i&gt;queenslandia&lt;/i&gt;) do not warrant differentiation above the species level. Thus, &lt;i&gt;Engelomorrisia&lt;/i&gt; is herein considered a junior synonym of &lt;i&gt;Bollandia&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Species included.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Bollandia albae&lt;/i&gt; (Gandl 1977), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia alekto&lt;/i&gt; (Hahn &amp; Hahn 1970), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia claviceps&lt;/i&gt; (Burmeister 1846), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia columba&lt;/i&gt; Tilsley 1988, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia eudora&lt;/i&gt; Hahn &amp; Hahn 1992, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia frechi&lt;/i&gt; (Scupin 1900), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia gerehahnorum&lt;/i&gt; Muller 2007, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia globiceps&lt;/i&gt; (Phillips 1836), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia megaira&lt;/i&gt; Muller 2000, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia pacifica&lt;/i&gt; Kobayashi &amp; Hamada 1980, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia persephonides&lt;/i&gt; Hahn &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2003, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia proserpina&lt;/i&gt; Hahn &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 1998, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia queenslandica&lt;/i&gt; (Engel &amp; Morris 1996), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia rugiceps&lt;/i&gt; Tilsley 1988, &lt;i&gt;Bollandia tisiphone&lt;/i&gt; (Hahn &amp; Hahn 1970), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia torionis&lt;/i&gt; (Gandl 1977), &lt;i&gt;Bollandia trivignoi&lt;/i&gt; Hahn &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 1996.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Age and distribution.&lt;/b&gt; Tournaisian to Vis&eacute;an in Australia, Central Asia, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland and Poland (Osm&oacute;lska 1970; Engel &amp; Morris 1996).&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Vanderlaan, Tegan A. &amp; Ebach, Malte C., 2015, A review of the Carboniferous and Permian trilobites of Australia, pp. 1-56 in Zootaxa 3926 (1)&lt;/i&gt; on pages 24-25, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3926.1.1, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/288002"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/288002&lt;/a&gt