Biological kingdoms?

[Kathryn]

How does this work nowadays? I tried to read the Wikipedia article, but I am skimming in the midst of a bunch of commotion in my living room and am not clear on what is generally accepted and what is just some scientist's opinion. looking at the chart towards the end of the article, I think I was taught The Whittaker 1969 classification. I guess my mom was taught Copeland 1938, both by her age and by recalling her surprise that fungi was its own kingdom when I learned this stuff. Given my age though, it seems that I would have been taught one of those Woese classifications, but those don't look familiar. So, anyway, I take it there's not a universally accepted system? Is there a generally accepted/taught one, and what is it?

[Dory]

:bigear:

I was taught the Whittaker by the looks of it, and I was born in '83 so that wouldn't have been right for my time, but I'm pretty sure that's what I was taught. I'm interested in reading what everyone else says.

[Kathryn]

Anybody?

[Jane in NC]

How does this work nowadays? I tried to read the Wikipedia article, but I am skimming in the midst of a bunch of commotion in my living room and am not clear on what is generally accepted and what is just some scientist's opinion. looking at the chart towards the end of the article, I think I was taught The Whittaker 1969 classification. I guess my mom was taught Copeland 1938, both by her age and by recalling her surprise that fungi was its own kingdom when I learned this stuff. Given my age though, it seems that I would have been taught one of those Woese classifications, but those don't look familiar. So, anyway, I take it there's not a universally accepted system? Is there a generally accepted/taught one, and what is it?

 

Several suggestions:

 

Examine what is taught in a generally accepted college text such as Biology by Campbell and Reece.

 

Taxonomy is not emphasized in modern biology--see cladistics. Bear in mind that taxonomy is bound to change as we learn more via technology. Much of the microbial world is still being discovered!

 

Science does not operate via "opinion" as you suggest. Nor are hypothesis and theory the same.

 

Finally I suggest you move your question to the high school board where these issues are more likely to be discussed. The general board moves quickly so your question can easily be lost. Further, there are a number of people on the high school board who do not frequent this board.

 

Best regards,

Jane

[Melissa in Australia]

I taught my children , Kingdom, Phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, and 6 kingdoms.

 

One interesting thing ( or I found it interesting) is that I have always taught my children and understood that humans are mammals, we produce milk, have warm blood and have hair. I was quiet shocked to find that many (home schooled)people don't view this classification as correct.

[Iucounu]

I have always taught my children and understood that humans are mammals, we produce milk, have warm blood and have hair. I was quiet shocked to find that many (home schooled)people don't view this classification as correct.

What?!? Seriously? :ohmy:

[Onceuponatime]

One interesting thing ( or I found it interesting) is that I have always taught my children and understood that humans are mammals, we produce milk, have warm blood and have hair. I was quiet shocked to find that many (home schooled)people don't view this classification as correct.

 

I think this viewpoint usually has more to do with religion than science. They might disagree with that though. :)

[love2read]

There are now two Domains and four Kingdoms

Domain Bacteria, Domain Archaea,

Kingdom Plantae, Kingdom Fungi, Kingdom Animaliea, Kingdom Protista

[SJ.]

There are now two Domains and four Kingdoms

Domain Bacteria, Domain Archaea,

Kingdom Plantae, Kingdom Fungi, Kingdom Animaliea, Kingdom Protista

 

This. I took a college biology class two years ago and this is what we covered.

[teachermom2834]

I taught my children , Kingdom, Phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, and 6 kingdoms.

 

One interesting thing ( or I found it interesting) is that I have always taught my children and understood that humans are mammals, we produce milk, have warm blood and have hair. I was quiet shocked to find that many (home schooled)people don't view this classification as correct.

 

Yes. I was shocked when my ds came home from co-op saying that humans aren't mammals- just similar to mammals.

[KidsHappen]

There are now two Domains and four Kingdoms

Domain Bacteria, Domain Archaea,

Kingdom Plantae, Kingdom Fungi, Kingdom Animaliea, Kingdom Protista

 

My dds at both middle and high school levels were taught that there were six kingdoms: the four you listed and the other two as also being kingdoms. This was news to me because when I went to school there were only five kingdoms but we did have nine planets.

[mama2bandg]

Organisms are classified into three Domains and six Kingdoms. The three Domains are Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya. The six kingdoms are Archaebacteria, Eubacteria, Fungi, Protista, Plantae, and Animalia. Members of Kingdom Archaeabacteria are in the Domain Archaea. Members of the Kingdom Eubacteria are in the Domain Bacteria, and members of the Kingdoms Fungi, Protista, Plantae, and Animalia are all in the Domain Eukarya.

 

When I first started teaching high school biology a number of years ago, all bacteria were classified in the Kingdom Monera. Scientists have since transition from five Kingdoms to six Kingdoms. The Six-Kingdom System of Classification makes more sense due to the significant differences between archaebacteria and eubacteria. The Kingdom Monera was too broad of a classification.

[TravelingChris]

I have never heard anyone say that humans are not mammals. Of course, we are. Special mammals but mammals nonetheless.

[Kathryn]

Several suggestions:

 

Examine what is taught in a generally accepted college text such as Biology by Campbell and Reece.

 

Taxonomy is not emphasized in modern biology--see cladistics. Bear in mind that taxonomy is bound to change as we learn more via technology. Much of the microbial world is still being discovered!

 

Science does not operate via "opinion" as you suggest. Nor are hypothesis and theory the same.

 

Finally I suggest you move your question to the high school board where these issues are more likely to be discussed. The general board moves quickly so your question can easily be lost. Further, there are a number of people on the high school board who do not frequent this board.

 

Best regards,

Jane

 

Not sure what the bolded is about. I did not suggest that science operates via "opinion." Classification is inherently subjective. Yes, there are schemes that make more sense than others, but it is subjective nonetheless and different people will come up with different schemes of classification that make the most sense to them. And I said absolutely nothing about hypothesis and theory. You seem to be on the lookout for someone criticizing science; that's not me. I'm simply asking what the current generally-accepted scheme of classifying life is since I've not taken a biology course in fifteen years and things appear to have changed from what I was taught then. I have no ulterior motive.

 

I taught my children , Kingdom, Phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, and 6 kingdoms.

 

One interesting thing ( or I found it interesting) is that I have always taught my children and understood that humans are mammals, we produce milk, have warm blood and have hair. I was quiet shocked to find that many (home schooled)people don't view this classification as correct.

 

Seriously? That's a new one to me. Wow!

[Melissa in Australia]

 

 

 

Seriously? That's a new one to me. Wow!

 

When I first heard this, ( from a homeschooled 16 year old). I posted on here about it, and many people wrote that they felt this was correct!

Personally I classify humans as mammals.

[Jane in NC]

Not sure what the bolded is about. I did not suggest that science operates via "opinion." Classification is inherently subjective. Yes, there are schemes that make more sense than others, but it is subjective nonetheless and different people will come up with different schemes of classification that make the most sense to them. And I said absolutely nothing about hypothesis and theory. You seem to be on the lookout for someone criticizing science; that's not me. I'm simply asking what the current generally-accepted scheme of classifying life is since I've not taken a biology course in fifteen years and things appear to have changed from what I was taught then. I have no ulterior motive.

 

 

 

Sorry--I do get a bit testy about this. Things change in science, perspectives change. People are regularly grumbling about Pluto as though the concept of nine planets is Biblical! Really, I am a nice person so I apologize for getting my knickers in a twist.

 

There is a book that may interest you: Naming Nature: The Clash between Instinct and Science. Link.

 

Again, apologies. Can I blame my testiness on the heat??

[Kathryn]

Sorry--I do get a bit testy about this. Things change in science, perspectives change. People are regularly grumbling about Pluto as though the concept of nine planets is Biblical! Really, I am a nice person so I apologize for getting my knickers in a twist.

 

There is a book that may interest you: Naming Nature: The Clash between Instinct and Science. Link.

 

Again, apologies. Can I blame my testiness on the heat??

 

:001_smile: it's okay, I just DON'T want to be misunderstood as someone who is critical of the scientific community in general when I really was just trying to find out what's currently generally accepted and was having a hard time doing so. Thank you!

[Kathryn]

Ooh, and that book looks great! AND my library has it! I must here confess that I'm a librarian not only by training/degree but by nature as well. Classification runs in my blood.

Edited June 24, 2012 by kebg11

[Jane in NC]

Ooh, and that book looks great! AND my library has it! I must here confess that I'm a librarian not only by training/degree but by nature as well. Classification runs in my blood.

 

Oh good! Maybe I have redeemed myself a bit!:blushing:

[Iucounu]

Yes. I was shocked when my ds came home from co-op saying that humans aren't mammals- just similar to mammals.

I'd be shocked too. That sort of misinformation could actually hurt a child's educational and professional prospects down the line.

[KidsHappen]

Organisms are classified into three Domains and six Kingdoms. The three Domains are Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya. The six kingdoms are Archaebacteria, Eubacteria, Fungi, Protista, Plantae, and Animalia. Members of Kingdom Archaeabacteria are in the Domain Archaea. Members of the Kingdom Eubacteria are in the Domain Bacteria, and members of the Kingdoms Fungi, Protista, Plantae, and Animalia are all in the Domain Eukarya.

 

When I first started teaching high school biology a number of years ago, all bacteria were classified in the Kingdom Monera. Scientists have since transition from five Kingdoms to six Kingdoms. The Six-Kingdom System of Classification makes more sense due to the significant differences between archaebacteria and eubacteria. The Kingdom Monera was too broad of a classification.

 

Yes, now that you mention it this is exactly what my children learned and then taught me as things had changed since I had been in school.

[Kathryn]

Organisms are classified into three Domains and six Kingdoms. The three Domains are Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya. The six kingdoms are Archaebacteria, Eubacteria, Fungi, Protista, Plantae, and Animalia. Members of Kingdom Archaeabacteria are in the Domain Archaea. Members of the Kingdom Eubacteria are in the Domain Bacteria, and members of the Kingdoms Fungi, Protista, Plantae, and Animalia are all in the Domain Eukarya.

 

When I first started teaching high school biology a number of years ago, all bacteria were classified in the Kingdom Monera. Scientists have since transition from five Kingdoms to six Kingdoms. The Six-Kingdom System of Classification makes more sense due to the significant differences between archaebacteria and eubacteria. The Kingdom Monera was too broad of a classification.

 

So, referring to the chart at the bottom of the Wikipedia link, the two Woese classifications From 1977 and 1990 (regarding domains and kingdoms) are in current use, and NOT the Cavalier-Smith from 2004? That one lists six kingdoms as bacteria, Protozoa, Chromista, Plantae, Fungi, and Animalia.

[mama2bandg]

So, referring to the chart at the bottom of the Wikipedia link, the two Woese classifications From 1977 and 1990 (regarding domains and kingdoms) are in current use, and NOT the Cavalier-Smith from 2004? That one lists six kingdoms as bacteria, Protozoa, Chromista, Plantae, Fungi, and Animalia.

 

All of the textbooks I have used/read do not subdivide Protista into Protozoa and Chromista, but do place the two groups of bacteria into different Kingdoms (Archaebacteria and Eubacteria). There's definitely more than one way to group organisms. I just think some classification systems are more widely accepted in the scientific community than others.

 

I do a really neat hardware classification with my students that demonstrates this concept. I give each group an identical jar of nuts, screws, bolts, nails, etc. and ask them to create a flow chart to organize the hardware into groups. It is interesting to see the different ways they organize the hardware and we're then able to make a great analogy with how scientists classify (or classified) organisms in different ways.