New SystematicsM.Raj

Associate ProfessorDarrang College

The approach of the population taxonomist differs rather drastically from the simple pigeonholing of classical Linnaean taxonomy

To emphasize the difference, Huxley (1940) introduced the term new systematics for the newer approach

Actually, its roots go back to the first half of the nineteenth century and some traces of the new systematics can he found in the writings of

taxonomists who worked as long as 150 years ago

It started primarily as a rebellion against the nominalistic-typological and thoroughly non-biological approach of certain, alas all too many,

taxonomists of the preceding period.

Every generation has its own new systematics and what might have been considered new in 1940 may indeed be very old systematics now.

According to Mayr(1963) “Perhaps it is best described as a viewpoint, an attitude, a general philosophy”.

Workers in the new systematics consider themselves biologists rather than filing clerks. This has a number of well-defined consequences in

their attitude toward their material and toward various techniques

These workers are conscious at all times that they are classifying organisms, not the remains of organisms or mere names.

As a consequence, they place considerable emphasis on so-called biological characteristics, that is on non morphological information

derived from behavior, physiology, biochemistry, ecology and so forth.

They appreciate the fact that all organisms occur in nature as members of populations and that specimens cannot be understood and properly classified unless they are treated as samples of natural populations.

As a consequence they attempt to collect statistically adequate samples, which in the case of variable species often amount to

hundreds or thousands of specimens in order to be able to undertake a study of individual and geographic variation with the help of the best

biometric and statistical tools.

Current model of the new systematics

If we attempted to describe the current model of the new systematics, we would see at once that every single item is merely the continuation of a trend which in most cases started more than 100 years ago. Some of these points follow

1.The utilization of an ever-increasing number of kinds of characters

and a continued depreciation of

key characters and single-character classifications, in contrast to the typological approach

2. A ready acceptance of new tools and techniques including the following:

a. The visual analysis (by sonagrarms and other means) of sounds in insects (cicadas. orthopterans) frogs and birds

b. The analysis of courtship displays and other behavior

Current model of the new systematics

c. The utilization of biochemical characters particularly those yielded by various methods of protein analysis

d. The utilization of computers to reduce the danger of subjectivity in character evaluation

Current model of the new systematics

3. A further clarification of concepts, for instance

a. A clearer separation of taxon from category

b. The recognition of the subspecies as a category, not an evolutionary unit

c. A clearer understanding of the causes of similarities and differences between taxa

It is evident that the new systemaics is neither a special technique nor a special method but a viewpoint or attitude which .can be applied at

every taxonomic level. However, its major impact has been in microtaxonomy.