Conflict about classifying Protist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter stanton
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The classification of protists remains contentious, with significant discrepancies between sources. According to biology lecture notes, protists are categorized under the Kingdom Protista, which is not recognized as a legitimate taxon. Wikipedia highlights ongoing debates regarding whether protists should be classified as a kingdom or domain. An expert's input categorizes Apicomplexa under the Domain Eukaryota and Kingdom Chromalveolata, emphasizing the need for further research to establish monophyletic groupings that meet clade criteria.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of biological classification systems
  • Familiarity with the concepts of domains and kingdoms in taxonomy
  • Knowledge of cladistics and phylogenetic analysis
  • Basic comprehension of eukaryotic cell structure
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the latest findings on protist classification and phylogeny
  • Study the principles of cladistics and their application in taxonomy
  • Explore the characteristics of the Kingdom Chromalveolata and its phyla
  • Investigate the implications of molecular genetics on traditional classification systems
USEFUL FOR

Biologists, taxonomists, and students of biology interested in the classification and evolutionary relationships of protists.

stanton
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
I was surpriesed to see that several information about protist is not consistent. Let's take a look.

According to my biology lecture note:
If it isn't anything, it is a protist:
Kingdom protists
-not a clade
-not a legitimate taxon



According to the wikipedia

There is still lot of conflict whether protist is a kingdom or domain.

According to an expert(annonymous):

Example:Apicomplexa=
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Chromalveolata
Superphylum: Alveolata
Phylum: Apicomplexa
excavata, chromalveolata, Rhizaria is kingdom.
------------------

What do you think? Everyone has different opinion how the protist should be classified. What should be preferred theses days? i.e., which one is more trustworthy?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Previously, the highest category of classification of organisms was kingdom. There 'were' five kingdoms: animals, plants, protists, bacteria and fungi. However, this classification was primarily based on things like morphology and when the molecular geneticists looked at it they discovered that these where not supported by the data. The new highest category became domain and the domains are Eukaryota, Archeae and Bacteria (sometimes called Eubacteria to avoid confusing it with the every day term "bacteria", which applies to archeae and bacteria). This was done in an effort to make systematics adhere to the principles of cladistics. Protista is an informal term for a loose grouping of various different phyla that does not fulfill the criteria for a clade (it is paraphyletic). It refers to solitary or undifferentiated colonial eukaryotes. More research is needed to fit these various phyla into monophyletic groups satisfying the criteria for a clade.
 

Thread 'What causes the asymmetry in a symmetrically developing organism?'

As child, before I got my first X-ray, I used to fantasize that I might have a mirror image anatomy - my heart on the right, my appendix on the right. Why not? (Caveat: I'm not talking about sci-fi molecular-level mirroring. We're not talking starvation because I couldn't process certain proteins, etc.) I'm simpy tlakng about, when a normal zygote divides, it technically has two options which way to form. Oen would expcet a 50:50 split. But we all have our heart on the left and our...
View full post »