Difference between revisions of "TAXONOMY"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{| width="100%" bgcolor="#fff4f4" id="toc" | {| width="100%" bgcolor="#fff4f4" id="toc" | ||
| − | !align="center" colspan="2"|Foraminiferal taxonomy is primarily based on the [[composition]] and morphology of the [[test]]. Unfortunately, "the division of the Foraminifera into subgroups is problematic; existing morphology- | + | !align="center" colspan="2"|Foraminiferal taxonomy is primarily based on the [[composition]] and morphology of the [[test]]. Unfortunately, "the division of the Foraminifera into subgroups is problematic; existing morphology-based schemes (e.g. Loeblich and Tappan 1988) are not fully consistent with molecular phylogenetic data ... Molecular analyses reveal that polythalamous tests evolved at least twice: in the lineage leading to a large radiation of agglutinated textulariids and calcareous rotaliids, and in the lineage |
| − | based schemes (e.g. Loeblich and Tappan 1988) are not fully consistent with molecular phylogenetic | ||
| − | data ... Molecular analyses reveal that polythalamous tests evolved at least twice: in the lineage | ||
| − | leading to a large radiation of agglutinated textulariids and calcareous rotaliids, and in the lineage | ||
leading to miliolids, characterized by microgranular, low-Mg calcitic walls" (after Pawlowski et al. 2003b; from [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/toc/jeu/52/5 Adl et al. 2005] - p.418). | leading to miliolids, characterized by microgranular, low-Mg calcitic walls" (after Pawlowski et al. 2003b; from [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/toc/jeu/52/5 Adl et al. 2005] - p.418). | ||
|} | |} | ||
