The perils of ‘point-and-click’ systematics

GRANT, T.; FAIVOVICH, J.; POL, D.

CLADISTICS (PRINT)

Academic Press

Lugar: Oxford; Año: 2003 vol. 19 p. 276 - 285

0748-3007

Four factors seem responsible for the rising preeminence of phylogenetic systematics in recent years. First, it is now recognized widely that evolutionary history must be considered when addressing any biological problem and that phylogenetic systematics is the field of biology that aims specifically to elucidate that history. Second, explicit numerical techniques have eliminated much of the subjectivity that characterized systematics in the post-Darwinian era. Third, technological advances in computer hardware and software make it possible to collate data and perform complex phylogenetic analyses in reasonable amounts of time and userfriendly environments. Fourth, standardized molecular techniques have been incorporated into systematics research, bringing massive amounts of data to bear on phylogenetic problems. These advances have helped phylogenetic systematics prosper, but they have also given rise to the modern phenomenon of “point-andclick” systematics. It has become possible to carry out extremely sophisticated-looking analyses without any consideration of the theory behind the commands, the underlying algorithms and assumptions, the pros and cons of the different approaches, or even the biological principles that provide the foundation of phylogenetic systematics. To a large degree user-friendliness has replaced scientific rigor in the design and implementation of systematics studies. We consider this issue in the light of the scope of recent publications such as Hall’s “Phylogenetic Trees Made Easy”.