Talk:Aceraceae

Aceraceae
According to Harrington et al. 2005:"Given the possibility of long branch attraction being a confounding force in this placement, the opposite conclusion—that Aceraceae and Hippocastanaceae are distinct, monophyletic families easily distinguished from nearly all Sapindaceae – cannot be ruled out on this basis alone. Nevertheless, support for the basal relationships between the constituent main clades in our analyses are much weaker than the overall support for Sapindaceae s.l. ..." Berton 05:52, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

This case is very similar to the of Malvaceae sensu lato, where the APG and Kubitzki system recognize that Malvaceae s. str. is monophyletic, but for not leaving the remaining of Malvales paraphyletic, then everything was lumped as Malvaceae sensu lato. However the homogeneity of the taxon is much more important than this, and these classifications sensu lato should be totally rejected. Berton 06:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Aceraceae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060226170716/http://delta-intkey.com:80/angio/www/aceracea.htm to http://delta-intkey.com/angio/www/aceracea.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)