Jump to content

Monera: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
←Blanked the page
m Reverting possible vandalism by 24.150.207.155 to version by Materialscientist. Questions, comments, complaints -> BRFA Thanks, ClueBot NG. (33301) (Bot)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Monera''' ({{IPA-en|məˈnɪərə|}} {{respell|mə|NEER|ə}}) is a now-obsolete taxonomic group in [[biological classification]] originally understood as one of [[Kingdom (biology)#Five kingdoms|five biological kingdoms]]. The kingdom Monera included most organisms with a [[prokaryote|prokaryotic]] [[cell (biology)|cell]] organization (that is, no nucleus). For this reason, the kingdom was sometimes called '''Prokaryota''' or '''Prokaryotae'''

Under the [[three-domain system]] of taxonomy established in 1991, the organisms formerly within Monera have been divided into two [[domain (biology)|domains]], [[Archaea]] and [[Bacteria]] (with [[Eukaryote]] as the third domain).
==History==
Traditionally the natural world was classified as animal, vegetable, or mineral as in [[Systema Naturae]]. After the discovery of [[microscope|microscopy]], attempts were made to fit microscopic organisms into either the plant or animal kingdoms. In 1866 [[Ernst Haeckel]] proposed a three kingdom system which added the Protista as a new kingdom that contained most microscopic organisms.<ref name="Haeckel">{{cite book|author = E. Haeckel|title = Generelle Morphologie der Organismen|publisher = Reimer, Berlin|year = 1867}}</ref>. One of his eight major divisions of Protista was called Moneres. Haeckel's Moneres included known bacterial groups such as [[Vibrio]]. Haeckel's Protista kingdom also included eukaryotic organisms now classified as [[Protist]]. It was later decided that Haeckel's Protista kingdom had proven to be too diverse to be seriously considered one single kingdom.

Although it was generally accepted that one could distinguish prokaryotes from eukaryotes on the basis of the presence of a [[Cell nucleus|nucleus]], [[mitosis]] versus [[binary fission]] as a way of reproducing, size, and other traits, the [[monophyly]] of the kingdom Monera (or for that matter, whether classification should be according to phylogeny) was controversial for many decades. Although distinguishing between prokaryotes from eukaryotes as a fundamental distinction is often credited to a 1937 paper by [[Édouard Chatton]] (little noted until 1962), he did not emphasize this distinction more than other biologists of his era.<ref name="sapp"/> [[Roger Stanier]] and [[C. B. van Niel]] believed that the bacteria (a term which at the time did not include [[blue-green algae]]) and the blue-green algae had a single origin, a conviction which culminated in Stanier writing in a letter in 1970, "I think it is now quite evident that the blue-green algae are not distinguishable from bacteria by any fundamental feature of their cellular organization".<ref>Roger Stanier to Peter Raven, 5 November 1970, National Archives of Canada, MG 31, accession J35, vol. 6, as quoted in Sapp, 2005</ref> Other researchers, such as [[Ernst Pringsheim, Jr.|E. G. Pringsheim]] writing in 1949, suspected separate origins for bacteria and blue-green algae. In 1974, the influential ''Bergey's Manual'' published a new edition coining the term cyanobacteria to refer to what had been called blue-green algae, marking the acceptance of this group within the Monera.<ref name="sapp">{{cite journal | title = The Prokaryote-Eukaryote Dichotomy: Meanings and Mythology | author = Jan Sapp | url = http://mmbr.asm.org/cgi/content/full/69/2/292 | journal = Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews | date = June 2005 | pages = 292–305 | volume = 69 | issue = 2 | doi = 10.1128/MMBR.69.2.292-305.2005 | pmid = 15944457 | pmc = 1197417}}</ref>

In 1969, [[Robert Whittaker]] published a proposed five kingdom system for classification of living organisms.<ref name="Whittaker1969">{{cite journal | author = Robert Whittaker | year= 1969 | title = New concepts of kingdoms or organisms. Evolutionary relations are better represented by new classifications than by the traditional two kingdoms | journal = [[Science (journal)|Science]] | volume = 163 | pages = 150–160 | pmid = 5762760 | doi = 10.1126/science.163.3863.150 | issue = 863 }}</ref> Whittaker's system placed most single celled organisms into either the prokaryotic Monera or the eukaryotic Protista. The other three kingdoms in his system were the eukaryotic Fungi, Animalia, and Plantae. Whittaker, however, did not believe that all his kingdoms were monophyletic.<ref name="sapp" />

In 1977, a [[Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|PNAS]] paper by [[Carl Woese]] and [[George E. Fox|George Fox]] demonstrated that the [[archaea]] (initially called archaebacteria) are not significantly closer in relationship to the [[bacteria]] than they are to [[eukaryote]]s. The paper received front-page coverage in ''[[The New York Times]]'' and great controversy initially, but the conclusions have since become accepted, leading to replacement of the kingdom Monera with the two kingdoms [[Bacteria]] and [[Archaea]].<ref name="sapp" /> However, [[Thomas Cavalier-Smith]] has never accepted the importance of the division between these two groups, and has published classifications in which the archaebacteria are part of a subkingdom of the Kingdom Bacteria.<ref name="CavalierSmith2004"/>

== Summary ==
{{Biological systems}}

== See also ==
* [[Prokaryote]]
* [[Bacterial cell structure]]
* [[Kingdom (biology)]]
* [[Endosymbiont]]
* [[Symbiogenesis]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== External links ==
* [http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=2439888 Bacterial evolution] by [[Carl Woese]] (1987). Woese reviewed the historical steps leading to the use of the term "Monera" and its later abandonment (full text online). {{Entrez Pubmed|2439888}}
* [http://www.thebigger.com/section/biology/monera/ What is Monera? A descriptive details of the entire kingdom]

[[Category:Prokaryotes]]
[[Category:Obsolete taxonomic groups]]
[[Category:Microbiology]]

[[ar:بدائيات]]
[[ast:Monera]]
[[ca:Monera]]
[[et:Monera]]
[[es:Monera]]
[[ga:Monera]]
[[gl:Monera]]
[[ko:모네라]]
[[id:Monera]]
[[lv:Monēras]]
[[lt:Moneros]]
[[mk:Монери]]
[[ms:Moneran]]
[[nl:Moneren]]
[[ja:モネラ界]]
[[pl:Monera (biologia)]]
[[pt:Monera]]
[[ro:Regn Monera]]
[[th:มอเนอรา]]
[[tr:Monera]]
[[vi:Giới Khởi sinh]]

Revision as of 22:22, 15 November 2010

Monera (/məˈnɪərə/ mə-NEER-ə) is a now-obsolete taxonomic group in biological classification originally understood as one of five biological kingdoms. The kingdom Monera included most organisms with a prokaryotic cell organization (that is, no nucleus). For this reason, the kingdom was sometimes called Prokaryota or Prokaryotae

Under the three-domain system of taxonomy established in 1991, the organisms formerly within Monera have been divided into two domains, Archaea and Bacteria (with Eukaryote as the third domain).

History

Traditionally the natural world was classified as animal, vegetable, or mineral as in Systema Naturae. After the discovery of microscopy, attempts were made to fit microscopic organisms into either the plant or animal kingdoms. In 1866 Ernst Haeckel proposed a three kingdom system which added the Protista as a new kingdom that contained most microscopic organisms.[1]. One of his eight major divisions of Protista was called Moneres. Haeckel's Moneres included known bacterial groups such as Vibrio. Haeckel's Protista kingdom also included eukaryotic organisms now classified as Protist. It was later decided that Haeckel's Protista kingdom had proven to be too diverse to be seriously considered one single kingdom.

Although it was generally accepted that one could distinguish prokaryotes from eukaryotes on the basis of the presence of a nucleus, mitosis versus binary fission as a way of reproducing, size, and other traits, the monophyly of the kingdom Monera (or for that matter, whether classification should be according to phylogeny) was controversial for many decades. Although distinguishing between prokaryotes from eukaryotes as a fundamental distinction is often credited to a 1937 paper by Édouard Chatton (little noted until 1962), he did not emphasize this distinction more than other biologists of his era.[2] Roger Stanier and C. B. van Niel believed that the bacteria (a term which at the time did not include blue-green algae) and the blue-green algae had a single origin, a conviction which culminated in Stanier writing in a letter in 1970, "I think it is now quite evident that the blue-green algae are not distinguishable from bacteria by any fundamental feature of their cellular organization".[3] Other researchers, such as E. G. Pringsheim writing in 1949, suspected separate origins for bacteria and blue-green algae. In 1974, the influential Bergey's Manual published a new edition coining the term cyanobacteria to refer to what had been called blue-green algae, marking the acceptance of this group within the Monera.[2]

In 1969, Robert Whittaker published a proposed five kingdom system for classification of living organisms.[4] Whittaker's system placed most single celled organisms into either the prokaryotic Monera or the eukaryotic Protista. The other three kingdoms in his system were the eukaryotic Fungi, Animalia, and Plantae. Whittaker, however, did not believe that all his kingdoms were monophyletic.[2]

In 1977, a PNAS paper by Carl Woese and George Fox demonstrated that the archaea (initially called archaebacteria) are not significantly closer in relationship to the bacteria than they are to eukaryotes. The paper received front-page coverage in The New York Times and great controversy initially, but the conclusions have since become accepted, leading to replacement of the kingdom Monera with the two kingdoms Bacteria and Archaea.[2] However, Thomas Cavalier-Smith has never accepted the importance of the division between these two groups, and has published classifications in which the archaebacteria are part of a subkingdom of the Kingdom Bacteria.[5]

Summary

Linnaeus
1735[6] 		Haeckel
1866[1] 		Chatton
1925[7] 		Copeland
1938[8] 		Whittaker
1969[4] 		Woese et al.
1990[9] 		Cavalier-Smith
1998,[5] 2015[10]
2 kingdoms 3 kingdoms 2 empires 4 kingdoms 5 kingdoms 3 domains 2 empires,
6/7 kingdoms
(not treated) Protista Prokaryota Monera Monera Bacteria Bacteria
Archaea Archaea (2015)
Eukaryota Protoctista Protista Eucarya "Protozoa"
"Chromista"
Vegetabilia Plantae Plantae Plantae Plantae
Fungi Fungi
Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia

See also

References

  1. ^ a b E. Haeckel (1867). Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. Reimer, Berlin. Cite error: The named reference "Haeckel" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b c d Jan Sapp (June 2005). "The Prokaryote-Eukaryote Dichotomy: Meanings and Mythology". Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 69 (2): 292–305. doi:10.1128/MMBR.69.2.292-305.2005. PMC 1197417. PMID 15944457.
  3. ^ Roger Stanier to Peter Raven, 5 November 1970, National Archives of Canada, MG 31, accession J35, vol. 6, as quoted in Sapp, 2005
  4. ^ a b Robert Whittaker (1969). "New concepts of kingdoms or organisms. Evolutionary relations are better represented by new classifications than by the traditional two kingdoms". Science. 163 (863): 150–160. doi:10.1126/science.163.3863.150. PMID 5762760. Cite error: The named reference "Whittaker1969" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  5. ^ a b Cavalier-Smith, T. (1998). "A revised six-kingdom system of life". Biological Reviews. 73 (3): 203–66. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1998.tb00030.x. PMID 9809012. S2CID 6557779.
  6. ^ Linnaeus, C. (1735). Systemae Naturae, sive regna tria naturae, systematics proposita per classes, ordines, genera & species.
  7. ^ Chatton, É. (1925). "Pansporella perplexa. Réflexions sur la biologie et la phylogénie des protozoaires". Annales des Sciences Naturelles - Zoologie et Biologie Animale. 10-VII: 1–84.
  8. ^ Copeland, H. (1938). "The kingdoms of organisms". Quarterly Review of Biology. 13 (4): 383–420. doi:10.1086/394568. S2CID 84634277.
  9. ^ Woese, C.; Kandler, O.; Wheelis, M. (1990). "Towards a natural system of organisms:proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 87 (12): 4576–9. Bibcode:1990PNAS...87.4576W. doi:10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576. PMC 54159. PMID 2112744.
  10. ^ Ruggiero, Michael A.; Gordon, Dennis P.; Orrell, Thomas M.; Bailly, Nicolas; Bourgoin, Thierry; Brusca, Richard C.; Cavalier-Smith, Thomas; Guiry, Michael D.; Kirk, Paul M.; Thuesen, Erik V. (2015). "A higher level classification of all living organisms". PLOS ONE. 10 (4): e0119248. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1019248R. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119248. PMC 4418965. PMID 25923521.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Monera&oldid=396989398"