Biology and Soil Institute. Far East Branch of Russian Academy of Science, ul. 100-letiya Vladivostoka 159, Vladivostok 690022, Russia

Abstract

Positive and negative comparisons of tenets of pattern-cladistics with typological ideas are discussed.In such analyses, the attention of reviewers is usually focused on issues of minor importance; thus, theclassification of ideas and the construction of the system of organisms suffer from the same goodmethods revealing "essences" of groups. Pattern-cladistics represent a more consistent systematicparadigm in comparison with original Hennig's views who tried to "follow from a phylogeny to asystem", i.e. to combine a "genealogical phylogenetics" (expressing relations of ancestors and descen-dants of the same rank) and a "hierarchical phylogenetics"; moreover, he thought that the former may bethe foundation on the latter, while this is completely. Only a hierarchy is of importance in pattern-cladistics, and a system construction is simultaneously revelation of a phylogeny (historical biota'sdevelopment). Just this removal of the necessity to trace sequences of character states for thedetermination of character hierarchy is perceived by many systematists as the rejection of evolution inpattern-cladistics. The latter is the systematic school which is most closely related to phylogenetictypology, but pattern-cladistics could be only considered as an "embryo" without concepts of a characterand a type characteristic of phylogenetic typology and without the method of character ranking.