TY - JOUR
AU - Lambert, D. M.
AB - 1990 399 POINTS OF VIEW BOCK, W. 1973. Philosophical foundations of clas- Hennig, Ashlock et al. on monophyly is sical evolutionary classification. Syst. Zool., 22:375- well worthwhile. The term is sufficiently central in systematics to warrant a coherent FARRIS, J. S. 1990. Haeckel, history, and Hull. Syst. discussion of the vagaries of its develop- Zool., 39:81-88. ment. I also note that Farris's paper ex- HULL, D. L. 1988. Science as a process. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago. 586 pp. emplifies several of the general themes of NELSON, G., AND N. PLATNICK. 1981. Systematics and my book. I expect my response to exem- biogeography. Cladistics and vicariance. Columbia plify these same themes. Univ. Press, New York. 592 pp. Received 9 July 1990; accepted 9 August 1990 REFERENCES ASHLOCK, P. D. 1979. An evolutionary systematist's view of classification. Syst. Zool., 28:441-450. Syst. Zool., 39(4):399-413, 1990 C. S. WHITE, B. MICHAUX, AN D D. M. LAMBERT Department of Zoology, Evolutionary Genetics Laboratory, University of Auckland, Private Bag, Auckland, New Zealand Our perception of the natural world, and place in the study of evolutionary biology. hence how we understand it, is colored by Judging from the reaction of Coyne et al. our underlying theoretical 
TI - Species and Neo-Darwinism
JO - Systematic Biology
DO - 10.2307/2992361
DA - 1990-12-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/species-and-neo-darwinism-VXK8a8Xjib
SP - 399
EP - 413
VL - 39
IS - 4
DP - DeepDyve
ER -