
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Systematics for laboratory activity.
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 1
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Goal: To introduce students to the concepts of holotype and paratype and morphological taxonomic classification, both historically and with current methods. Materials : Sheet illustrating 29 Caminalcules (‘extant’) from Sokal, R. R. (June 1983). "A phylogenetic analysis of the Caminalcules. I. The data base". Systematic Zoology 32 (2): 159– Show the class the picture of a single caminalcule (Number 10). Some questions to discuss: How would you approach classification of a brand new organism? What would you keep, and how would you mark it? What would you do with that specimen? How would others compare it? Discuss holotypes and paratypes and how natural history museums use them Split the class into groups of four. Hand out the sheet with all 29 caminalcules and ask the groups to categorize them into ‘species’ (marking down the specimen numbers in each species). Also ask them to identify the defining features of each species – how do we tell them apart from one another? What would differentiate one group from another? Broadly, we need characters that don’t vary between groups We care about shared derived traits, or synapomorphies Will talk about reconstructing phylogenies later On the chalkboard, expand the following table with as many groups and species as needed. Group Specie s 1 (#’s) Species 1 (features) Questions for discussion: Are there differences between groups for which specimens to include? Differences in features chosen? What were the challenges students faced when doing the classification?