Plant taxonomy is an empirical science.
So: take a look at the data set, draw up a hypothesis, check this against an
expanded dataset and evaluate for descriptive and predictive quality.

Logic is of limited value, when measured against reality. Just a tool.

Criteria are whatever works best. New criteria are accepted all the time.
Once upon a time it was thought that all the trees MUST be related. These
days it is chloroplast DNA that give best results, with morphology being
reexamined to fit the new picture. Over the horizon are new sets of
DNA-data.
PvR

BJocon schreef
( *Rank-Amateur Alert* )

My wife is grower/manager for the cactus/succulent division of a large
company. I listen to her babble off about what critter is related to
whatever; and not much of cacti taxonomy makes sense to me.

Because I am limited (?) by the logic of a Computer Science education,
what do you bio-types use for classification criteria??

thanx much
Worf & me