Talk:Pteridopsida

Whose classification is being followed here? All classifications are opinions and the source of this information should be cited, particularly here because fern classification is so messy. MrDarwin 19:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Leptosporangiate fern

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge into leptosporangiate fern. -- Kingdon (talk) 20:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The articles at leptosporangiate fern and Pteridopsida overlap very substantially in content. I see no reason to separate them. If they are merged, I don't have a strong opinion about what the resulting article should be named. Kingdon (talk) 16:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still looking for input, especially on what the resulting article should be named. I'm pretty sure the literature tends to say "leptosporangiate fern" and I'm kind of nervous about Pteridopsida especially as this classification is incompatible with Chase and Reveal (2009). So I guess at the moment I'm leaning towards "leptosporangiate fern" but what do others think? Kingdon (talk) 13:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; "leptosporangiate fern" doesn't have circumscription problems (the name specifies the apomorphy), but Pteridopsida does—in some older classifications (especially those that have a single phylum Tracheophyta), that term is used for all ferns.--Curtis Clark (talk) 14:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I sure have no problem with that. The two ARE exactly the same thing in modern usage. At the same time, "monilophyte" should probably be merged into "pteridophyte" as they are the same thing. Of course, in this case we have a conflict between Phylocode, which prefers "Monilophyta" and traditional hierarchical classification, which has conserved "Pteridophyta" despite its past mis-inclusion of lycopsids. Another possible approach here under traditional classification was to use "Polypodiophyta" which removes the "taint" surrounding Pteridophyta, but other people wouldn't go for it. If "Polypodiophyta" were used, then THIS article would have to be "Polypodiopsida". I'm not familiar with the Chase & Reveal citation, but I'll try to find it and look at it.jaknouse (talk) 14:41, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chase and Reveal is the paper which came out in conjunction with (but separately from) the APG III system, which puts all land plants into a single class (Equisetopsida). I don't know if it is likely to catch on, but given that the authors are two of the more famous systematists, I doubt it will be completely ignored. Kingdon (talk) 19:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to mention that circumscription at Equisetopsida? Lavateraguy (talk) 20:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. There appears to be a different Phylocode name for the ferns: Moniloformopses. I've got the 2004 Taxon paper, I'll check on that. jaknouse (talk) 14:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the Cantino et al 2007 paper in Taxon; they used Monilophyta. jaknouse (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monilophyte is not the same as pteridophyte. Pteridophyte is a term that has at most times included the lycophytes, and these are not included in the monilophytes. Pteridophyte refers to a paraphyletic grade between the bryophytes and seed plants. The Moniloforms also include the extinct Cladoxylopsida (which may or may not full under the current definition of "fern"), but do not include a number of other fossil pteridophyte groups.

The taxonomic terminology for the ferns is still so very unstable, I'd prefer that we used decscriptive terminology of fern and leptosporangiate fern. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.