Phylogeny,classification and nomenclature: a reply to F. Pleijel and G. W. Rouse

In systematics, the uncovering of monophyletic units, of sister group relationships and also of paraphyla is an important part of primary research. The hypotheses derived are thus subject to falsification and are subject to change. In contrast, classifications are a secondary step, as they are derived from such hypotheses. Classifications are based on different philosophies, which permit different solutions as to how results in the fields of taxonomy and phylogenetics can be transposed into a ‘system’. The function of classifications is at least partly utilitarian, and this is even more true for the names and principles of nomenclature. Nomenclature is simply a tool for information retrieval and for safeguarding understanding. Directly linking names and cladograms or nodes, respectively – making them subject to changes by falsification – would deliberately ignore the primary, strictly utilitarian function of long‐established principles of nomenclature and would endanger an instrument that functions almost perfectly. Approaches to introduce a so‐called PhyloCode should therefore not be pursued, as there is no chance at all that this kind of code could be generally accepted.     

Workshop on barcoded DNA: application to rotifer phylogeny,evolution, and systematics

DNA barcoding is the use of segments of gene sequences to assign individual organisms to species. Thus it can be used to define species and to identify specimens. Barcoding has been applied as an aid to systematics with little controversy in both monogonont and bdelloid rotifers, and also in environmental sequencing projects designed to determine the diversity of microscopic organisms. In contrast, a great deal of controversy has arisen over the creation of the Consortium for the Barcode of Life, a major initiative to barcode all the species in several major groups of animals, with the long-range goal of barcoding all species of organisms. This is a very brief review of DNA barcoding, especially as applied to rotifers, and a summary of the results of a workshop held at the 11th International Workshop on Rotifera. Guest editors: S. S. S. Sarma, R. D. Gulati, R. L. Wallace, S. Nandini, H. J. Dumont and R. Rico-Martínez Advances in Rotifer Research     

Binding of collagen to group A, B, C, D and G streptococci

Abstract Binding of ¹²⁵I-labelled collagen type II to group A, B, C, D and G streptococci was studied. Strains of all five serogroups were found to bind. Binding to one high-binding strain (group G, strain 12127) was characterised. This was reversible, saturable with time and inhibited by unlabelled type II collagen, but not by other proteins such as fibronectin and ovalbumin. However, binding was inhibited by unlabelled type I, II and III collagens and gelatin, suggesting that a common structure of various collagens is involved in binding.