OPERATIONAL CRITERIA FOR DELIMITING SPECIES
By J. W. Sites, Jonathon C. Marshall. 2004
793 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9700ccf23b12a21ae4071773a9869f58440f0462
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecological Modeling
- I. J. De la Riva
- Jose Padial
- Bryan C. Carstens
- S. Cameron
- M. Vences
- Hang Sun
- John Weins
- M. Pérez‐Losada
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- I. J. De la Riva
- Jose Padial
- M. Vences
- John Weins
- M. Pérez‐Losada
- Santiago Castroviejo‐Fisher
- Alexandros Stamatakis
- Aurélien Miralles
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Hang Sun
- John Weins
- M. Pérez‐Losada
- Chaolun Allen Chen
- Alexandros Stamatakis
- I. J. De la Riva
- Aurélien Miralles
- Andrés M. Cuervo
Citations in the corpus
- Deciphering the products of evolution at the species level: the need for an integrative taxonomy (2009, background): “Thus, incongruence among lines of evidence was commonly interpreted either as evidence of erroneous taxonomic hypotheses or of the intrinsic limitations of particular concepts, methods or characters (Sites & Marshall 2004).”
- The integrative future of taxonomy (2010, methodology): “DNA sequences can be examined using non-tree based methods to provide diagnostic differences among species [49], but most frequently they are analyzed using tree-based methods to search for monophyletic groups that could represent species [22].”
- Quantitative criteria for species delimitation (2010, background): “We therefore agree that taxonomic decisions should be based on the maximum number of available characters (de Queiroz 1998, 2007, Sites & Marshall 2004, Winker 2009), and that the ideal scenario involves a combination of ecological, behavioural, phenotypic and genotypic data (e.g. Yoder et al.…”
- Phylogenetic species delimitation of the earthworms Eisenia fetida (Savigny, 1826) and Eisenia andrei Bouché, 1972 (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences (2005, methodology): “Recent revisions of these and other more classical methods have organized them into two general categories of tree- and nontreebased approaches ( Sites and Marshall, 2003, 2004 ).”
- Cuticular hydrocarbon profiles as a taxonomic tool: advantages, limitations and technical aspects (2012, background): “The problem of finding a boundary or range beyond which a species can be classed as independent is common to all taxonomic tools (Sites & Marshall, 2004).”
- Field and Laboratory Methods for DNA Studies on Deep-sea Isopod Crustaceans (2014, background): “Taxonomists work− ing on deep−sea isopods classically (even though usually not explicitly stating so) apply the morphological (genotypic) cluster concept (Mallet 1995) when delimita− ting and describing new taxa using purely morphological data under the assump− tion that between−species variability ”
- Ecologically differentiated stress-tolerant endosymbionts in the dinoflagellate genus Symbiodinium (Dinophyceae) Clade D are different species (2014, methodology): “Using this integrative approach, species are formally described that satisfy the core principles of major species concepts (Sites & Marshall 2004; de Queiroz 2007).”
- Blind to morphology: genetics identifies several widespread ecologically common species and few endemics among Indo‐Pacific cauliflower corals (Pocillopora, Scleractinia) (2013, background): “The recent evaluation of genetic traits has led to important changes in systematics and taxonomy in ways that have improved our understanding of ecological and evolutionary patterns and processes (Sites & Marshall, 2004).”