Kingdom (biology)

In biology, a kingdom is the second highest taxonomic rank, just below domain. Kingdoms are divided into smaller groups called
phyla (singular phylum).

Traditionally, textbooks from Canada and the United States have used a system of six kingdoms (Animalia, Plantae, Fungi, Protista,
Archaea/Archaebacteria, and Bacteria or Eubacteria), while textbooks in other parts of the world, such as Bangladesh, Brazil,
Greece, India, Pakistan, Spain, and the United Kingdom have used five kingdoms (Animalia, Plantae, Fungi, Protista and Monera).

Some recent classifications based on modern cladistics have explicitly abandoned the term kingdom, noting that some traditional
kingdoms are not monophyletic, meaning that they do not consist of all the descendants of a common ancestor. The terms flora (for
plants), fauna (for animals), and, in the 21st century, funga (for fungi) are also used for life present in a particular region or
time.[1][2]

Definition and associated terms

When Carl Linnaeus introduced the rank-based system of nomenclature into biology in 1735, the highest rank was given the name
"kingdom" and was followed by four other main or principal ranks: class, order, genus and species.[3] Later two further main ranks
were introduced, making the sequence kingdom, phylum or division, class, order, family, genus and species.[4] In 1990, the rank of
domain was introduced above kingdom.[5]
The hierarchy of
Prefixes can be added so subkingdom (subregnum) and infrakingdom (also known as infraregnum) are the two ranks immediately biological classification's
below kingdom. Superkingdom may be considered as an equivalent of domain or empire or as an independent rank between eight major taxonomic
ranks. A domain
kingdom and domain or subdomain. In some classification systems the additional rank branch (Latin: ramus) can be inserted
contains one or more
between subkingdom and infrakingdom, e.g., Protostomia and Deuterostomia in the classification of Cavalier-Smith.[6] kingdoms. Intermediate
minor rankings are not
shown.
History

Two kingdoms of life

The classification of living things into animals and plants is an ancient one. Aristotle (384–322 BC) classified animal species in his History of Animals, while
his pupil Theophrastus (c. 371–c. 287 BC) wrote a parallel work, the Historia Plantarum, on plants.[7]

Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778) laid the foundations for modern biological nomenclature, now regulated by the Nomenclature Codes, in 1735. He distinguished two
kingdoms of living things: Regnum Animale ('animal kingdom') and Regnum Vegetabile ('vegetable kingdom', for plants). Linnaeus also included minerals in his
classification system, placing them in a third kingdom, Regnum Lapideum.

⁠ Regnum Animale (animals)

⁠ Life ⁠
⁠ ⁠ Regnum Vegetabile ('vegetables'/plants)
⁠
Non‑life ⁠ Regnum Lapideum (minerals)
⁠ ⁠

Three kingdoms of life

In 1674, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, often called the "father of microscopy", sent the Royal Society of London a copy of his first observations of microscopic
single-celled organisms. Until then, the existence of such microscopic organisms was entirely unknown. Despite this, Linnaeus did not include any microscopic
creatures in his original taxonomy.

At first, microscopic organisms were classified within the animal and plant kingdoms. However, by the mid–19th century, it had become clear to many that "the
existing dichotomy of the plant and animal kingdoms [had become] rapidly blurred at its boundaries and outmoded".[8]

In 1860 John Hogg proposed the Protoctista, a third kingdom of life composed of "all the lower creatures, or the primary organic beings"; he retained Regnum
Lapideum as a fourth kingdom of minerals.[8] In 1866, Ernst Haeckel also proposed a third kingdom of life, the Protista, for "neutral organisms" or "the
kingdom of primitive forms", which were neither animal nor plant; he did not include the Regnum Lapideum in his scheme.[8] Haeckel revised the content of
this kingdom a number of times before settling on a division based on whether organisms were unicellular (Protista) or multicellular (animals and plants).[8]

⁠ Kingdom Protista or Protoctista

⁠
⁠ Life ⁠ Kingdom Plantae
⁠ ⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠
Non‑life ⁠ Regnum Lapideum (minerals)
⁠ ⁠
Four kingdoms
The development of microscopy revealed important distinctions between those organisms whose cells
do not have a distinct nucleus (prokaryotes) and organisms whose cells do have a distinct nucleus
(eukaryotes). In 1937 Édouard Chatton introduced the terms "prokaryote" and "eukaryote" to
differentiate these organisms.[9]

In 1938, Herbert F. Copeland proposed a four-kingdom classification by creating the novel Kingdom
Monera of prokaryotic organisms; as a revised phylum Monera of the Protista, it included organisms
now classified as Bacteria and Archaea. Ernst Haeckel, in his 1904 book The Wonders of Life, had
placed the blue-green algae (or Phycochromacea) in Monera; this would gradually gain acceptance, and
the blue-green algae would become classified as bacteria in the phylum Cyanobacteria.[8][9]

In the 1960s, Roger Stanier and C. B. van Niel promoted and popularized Édouard Chatton's earlier
work, particularly in their paper of 1962, "The Concept of a Bacterium"; this created, for the first time,
a rank above kingdom—a superkingdom or empire—with the two-empire system of prokaryotes and
eukaryotes.[9] The two-empire system would later be expanded to the three-domain system of Archaea,
Bacteria, and Eukaryota.[10]

⁠Empire Prokaryota ⁠ Kingdom Monera

⁠ ⁠
Haeckel's original (1866) conception of the three
⁠ Kingdom Protista or Protoctista
kingdoms of life, including the new kingdom Protista.
Life ⁠ Notice the inclusion of the cyanobacterium Nostoc with
⁠ ⁠Empire Eukaryota ⁠ Kingdom Plantae plants.
⁠ ⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠

Five kingdoms
The differences between fungi and other organisms regarded as plants had long been recognised by some; Haeckel had moved the fungi out of Plantae into
Protista after his original classification,[8] but was largely ignored in this separation by scientists of his time. Robert Whittaker recognized an additional
kingdom for the Fungi.[11] The resulting five-kingdom system, proposed in 1969 by Whittaker, has become a popular standard and with some refinement is still
used in many works and forms the basis for new multi-kingdom systems. It is based mainly upon differences in nutrition; his Plantae were mostly multicellular
autotrophs, his Animalia multicellular heterotrophs, and his Fungi multicellular saprotrophs.

The remaining two kingdoms, Protista and Monera, included unicellular and simple cellular colonies.[11] The five kingdom system may be combined with the
two empire system. In the Whittaker system, Plantae included some algae. In other systems, such as Lynn Margulis's system of five kingdoms, the plants
included just the land plants (Embryophyta), and Protoctista has a broader definition.[12]

Following publication of Whittaker's system, the five-kingdom model began to be commonly used in high school biology textbooks.[13] But despite the
development from two kingdoms to five among most scientists, some authors as late as 1975 continued to employ a traditional two-kingdom system of animals
and plants, dividing the plant kingdom into subkingdoms Prokaryota (bacteria and cyanobacteria), Mycota (fungi and supposed relatives), and Chlorota (algae
and land plants).[14]

⁠Empire Prokaryota ⁠ Kingdom Monera

⁠ ⁠
⁠ Kingdom Protista or Protoctista
⁠
Life ⁠ Kingdom Plantae
⁠ ⁠Empire Eukaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Fungi
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠
 Whittaker's five kingdom system (1969)[11]

Kingdom Monera Kingdom Protista Kingdom Plantae Kingdom Fungi Kingdom Animalia

Branch Myxomonera Phylum Euglenophyta Subkingdom Subkingdom Gymnomycota Subkingdom Agnotozoa

Phylum Chrysophyta Rhodophycophyta
Phylum Cyanophyta Phylum Myxomycota Phylum Mesozoa
Phylum Pyrrophyta Phylum Rhodophyta
Phylum Myxobacteriae Phylum Acrasiomycota Subkingdom Parazoa
Phylum Hyphochytridiomycota
Branch Mastigomonera Subkingdom Phylum Labyrinthulomycota
Phylum Phaeophycophyta Phylum Porifera
Plasmodiophoromycota Subkingdom Dimastigomycota
Phylum Eubacteriae Phylum Archaeocyatha †
Phylum Sporozoa Phylum Phaeophyta
Phylum Actinomycota Phylum Oomycota Subkingdom Eumetazoa
Phylum Cnidosporidia Subkingdom Euchlorophyta
Phylum Spirochaetae Subkingdom Eumycota
Phylum Zoomastigina Branch Radiata
Branch Chlorophycophyta
Phylum Sarcodina Branch
Opisthomastigomycota Phylum Cnidaria
Phylum Ciliophora Phylum Chlorophyta
Phylum Ctenophora
Phylum Charophyta Phylum Chytridiomycota
Branch Bilateria
Branch Metaphyta Branch Amastigomycota
Grade Acoelomata
Phylum Bryophyta Phylum Zygomycota
Phylum Tracheophyta Phylum Ascomycota Phylum Platyhelminthes
Phylum Basidiomycota Phylum Nemertea or
Rhynchocoela
Grade Pseudocoelomata

Phylum Acanthocephala
Phylum Aschelminthes
Phylum Entoprocta or Kamptozoa
Grade Coelomata

Subgrade Schizocoela

Phylum Bryozoa or Ectoprocta

Phylum Brachiopoda
Phylum Phoronida
Phylum Mollusca
Phylum Sipunculoidea
Phylum Echiuroidea
Phylum Annelida
Phylum Arthropoda
Subgrade Enterocoela

Phylum Brachiata or
Pogonophora
Phylum Chaetognatha
Phylum Echinodermata
Phylum Hemichordata
Phylum Chordata

Six kingdoms
In 1977, Carl Woese and colleagues proposed the fundamental subdivision of the prokaryotes into the Eubacteria (later called the Bacteria) and Archaebacteria
(later called the Archaea), based on ribosomal RNA structure;[15] this would later lead to the proposal of three "domains" of life, of Bacteria, Archaea, and
Eukaryota.[5] Combined with the five-kingdom model, this created a six-kingdom model, where the kingdom Monera is replaced by the kingdoms Bacteria and
Archaea.[16] This six-kingdom model is commonly used in recent US high school biology textbooks, but has received criticism for compromising the current
scientific consensus.[13] But the division of prokaryotes into two kingdoms remains in use with the recent seven kingdoms scheme of Thomas Cavalier-Smith,
although it primarily differs in that Protista is replaced by Protozoa and Chromista.[17]

⁠ Kingdom Eubacteria (Bacteria)

⁠ ⁠Domain Prokaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Archaebacteria (Archaea)
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Protista or Protoctista
Life ⁠
⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Plantae
⁠ ⁠Domain Eukaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Fungi
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠

Eight kingdoms
Thomas Cavalier-Smith supported the consensus at that time, that the difference between Eubacteria and Archaebacteria was so great (particularly considering
the genetic distance of ribosomal genes) that the prokaryotes needed to be separated into two different kingdoms. He then divided Eubacteria into two
subkingdoms: Negibacteria (Gram-negative bacteria) and Posibacteria (Gram-positive bacteria). Technological advances in electron microscopy allowed the
separation of the Chromista from the Plantae kingdom. Indeed, the chloroplast of the chromists is located in the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum instead of
in the cytosol. Moreover, only chromists contain chlorophyll c. Since then, many non-photosynthetic phyla of protists, thought to have secondarily lost their
chloroplasts, were integrated into the kingdom Chromista.

Finally, some protists lacking mitochondria were discovered.[18] As mitochondria were known to be the result of the endosymbiosis of a proteobacterium, it was
thought that these amitochondriate eukaryotes were primitively so, marking an important step in eukaryogenesis. As a result, these amitochondriate protists
were separated from the protist kingdom, giving rise to the, at the same time, superkingdom and kingdom Archezoa. This superkingdom was opposed to the
Metakaryota superkingdom, grouping together the five other eukaryotic kingdoms (Animalia, Protozoa, Fungi, Plantae and Chromista). This was known as the
Archezoa hypothesis, which has since been abandoned;[19] later schemes did not include the Archezoa–Metakaryota divide.[6][17]

⁠ Kingdom Eubacteria
⁠ ⁠Superkingdom Prokaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Archaebacteria
⁠
⁠ ⁠Superkingdom Archezoa‡ ⁠ Kingdom Archezoa‡
⁠ ⁠ ⁠
⁠ Kingdom Protozoa
Life ⁠
⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Chromista
⁠
⁠ ⁠Superkingdom Metakaryota‡ ⁠ Kingdom Plantae
⁠ ⁠ ⁠
⁠ Kingdom Fungi
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠
‡ No longer recognized by taxonomists.

Six kingdoms (1998)

In 1998, Cavalier-Smith published a six-kingdom model,[6] which has been revised in subsequent papers. The version published in 2009 is shown
below.[20][a][21] Cavalier-Smith no longer accepted the importance of the fundamental Eubacteria–Archaebacteria divide put forward by Woese and others and
supported by recent research.[22] The kingdom Bacteria (sole kingdom of empire Prokaryota) was subdivided into two sub-kingdoms according to their
membrane topologies: Unibacteria and Negibacteria. Unibacteria was divided into phyla Archaebacteria and Posibacteria; the bimembranous-unimembranous
transition was thought to be far more fundamental than the long branch of genetic distance of Archaebacteria, viewed as having no particular biological
significance.

Cavalier-Smith does not accept the requirement for taxa to be monophyletic ("holophyletic" in his terminology) to be valid. He defines Prokaryota, Bacteria,
Negibacteria, Unibacteria, and Posibacteria as valid paraphyla (therefore "monophyletic" in the sense he uses this term) taxa, marking important innovations of
biological significance (in regard of the concept of biological niche).

In the same way, his paraphyletic kingdom Protozoa includes the ancestors of Animalia, Fungi, Plantae, and Chromista. The advances of phylogenetic studies
allowed Cavalier-Smith to realize that all the phyla thought to be archezoans (i.e. primitively amitochondriate eukaryotes) had in fact secondarily lost their
mitochondria, typically by transforming them into new organelles: Hydrogenosomes. This means that all living eukaryotes are in fact metakaryotes, according
to the significance of the term given by Cavalier-Smith. Some of the members of the defunct kingdom Archezoa, like the phylum Microsporidia, were
reclassified into kingdom Fungi. Others were reclassified in kingdom Protozoa, like Metamonada which is now part of infrakingdom Excavata.

Because Cavalier-Smith allows paraphyly, the diagram below is an 'organization chart', not an 'ancestor chart', and does not represent an evolutionary tree.

⁠ ⁠Empire Prokaryota ⁠ Kingdom Bacteria — includes Archaebacteria as part of a subkingdom

⁠ ⁠ ⁠
⁠ Kingdom Protozoa — e.g. Amoebozoa, Choanozoa, Excavata
⁠

⁠ Kingdom Chromista — e.g. Alveolata, cryptophytes, Heterokonta (Brown Algae, Diatoms etc.), Haptophyta,
Life ⁠ Rhizaria
⁠ ⁠ ⁠Empire Eukaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Plantae — e.g. glaucophytes, red and green algae, land plants
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Fungi
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠
 Cavalier-Smith's six kingdom system (1998)[6]

Kingdom Bacteria Kingdom Protozoa Kingdom Fungi Kingdom Animalia

Subkingdom Negibacteria Subkingdom Archezoa Subkingdom Eomycota Subkingdom Radiata
Infrakingdom Lipobacteria Phylum Metamonada Phylum Archemycota Infrakingdom Spongiaria
Superphylum Eobacteria Subphylum Eopharyngia Subphylum Dictyomycotina Phylum Porifera
Phylum Heliobacteria Subphylum Axostylaria Class Chytridiomycetes Subphylum Hyalospongia
Phylum Hadobacteria Phylum Trichozoa Subclass Rumpomycetidae Subphylum Calcispongiae
Subphylum Chlorobacteria Subphylum Anaeromonada Subclass Spizomycetidae Subphylum Archaeocyath
Subphylum Deinobacteria Subphylum Parabasala Class Enteromycetes Infrakingdom Coelenterata
Superphylum Endoflagellata Subkingdom Neozoa Subphylum Melanomycotina Phylum Cnidaria
Phylum Spirochaetae Infrakingdom Sarcomastigota Infraphylum Allomycotina Subphylum Anthozoa
Subphylum Euspirochaetae Phylum Neomonada Class Allomycetes Subphylum Medusozoa
Subphylum Leptospirae Subphylum Apusozoa Infraphylum Zygomycotina Infrakingdom Placozoa
Infrakingdom Glycobacteria Subphylum Isomita Superclass Eozygomycetia Phylum Placozoa
Superphylum Pimelobacteria Subphylum Choanozoa Class Bolomycetes Subkingdom Myxozoa
Phylum Sphingobacteria Phylum Cercozoa Class Glomomycetes Phylum Myxosporidia
Subphylum Chlorobibacteria Subphylum Phytomyxa Superclass Neozygomycetia Subkingdom Bilateria
Subphylum Flavobacteria Subphylum Reticulofilosa Class Zygomycetes Branch Protostomia
Phylum Eurybacteria Subphylum Monadofilosa Subclass Mucoromycetidae Infrakingdom Lophozoa
Subphylum Sclenobacteria Phylum Foraminifera Subclass Meromycetidae Superphylum Polyzoa
Subphylum Fusobacteria Phylum Amoebozoa Class Zoomycetes Phylum Bryozoa
Subphylum Fibrobacteria Subphylum Lobosa Subclass Entomycetidae Subphylum Gymnolaem
Phylum Cyanobacteria Subphylum Conosa Subclass Pedomycetidae Subphylum Lophopoda
Subphylum Gloeobacteria Infraphylum Archamoebae Superorder Trichomycetalia Phylum Kamptozoa
Subphylum Phycobacteria Infraphylum Mycetozoa Superorder Pyxomycetalia Subphylum Entoprocta
Phylum Proteobacteria Superclass Eumyxa Phylum Microsporidia Subphylum Cycliophor
Subphylum Rhodobacteria Superclass Dictyostelia Class Minisporea Superphylum Conchozoa
Infraphylum Alphabacteria Infrakingdom Discicristata Class Microsporea Phylum Mollusca
Infraphylum Chromatibacteria Phylum Percolozoa Subclass Pleistophorea Subphylum Bivalvia
Subphylum Thiobacteria Subphylum Tetramitia Subclas Disporea Subphylum Glossopho
Superphylum Planctobacteria Subphylum Pseudociliata Subkingdom Neomycota Infraphylum Univalvia
Phylum Planctobacteria Phylum Euglenozoa Phylum Ascomycota Infraphylum Spiculata
Subkingdom Unibacteria Subphylum Plicostoma Subphylum Hemiascomycotina Infraphylum Cephalop
Infrakingdom Posibacteria Subphylum Saccostoma Class Taphrinomycetes Phylum Brachiozoa
Phylum Posibacteria Infrakingdom Alveolata Class Geomycetes Subphylum Brachiopod
Subphylum Teichobacteria Superphylum Miozoa Class Endomycetes Subphylum Phoronida
Infraphylum Endobacteria Phylum Dinozoa Subclass Dipomycetidae Superphylum Sipuncula
Infraphylum Actinobacteria Subphylum Protalveolata Subclass Saccharomycetidae Phylum Sipuncula
Subphylum Togobacteria Subphylum Dinoflagellata Subphylum Euascomycotina Superphylum Vermizoa
Infrakingdom Archaebacteria Phylum Sporozoa Class Discomycetes Phylum Annelida
Phylum Mendosicutes Subphylum Gregarinae Subclass Calycomycetidae Subphylum Polychaeta
Subphylum Euryarcheota Subphylum Coccidiomorpha Subclass Lecomycetidae Infraphylum Opercula
Infraphylum Halomebacteria Subphylum Manubrispora Subclass Pezomycetidae Infraphylum Pharynga
Infraphylum Eurytherma Superphylum Heterokaryota Class Pyrenomycetes Subphylum Clitellata
Subphylum Sulfobacteria Phylum Ciliophora Subclass Verrucomycetidae Subphylum Echiura
Subphylum Tubulicorticata Subclass Ostiomycetidae Subphylum Pogonopho
Subphylum Epiplasmata Class Loculomycetes Phylum Nemertina
Subphylum Filocorticata Subclass Dendromycetidae Infrakingdom Chaetogna
Infrakingdom Actinopoda Subclass Loculoascomycetidae Phylum Chaetognatha
Phylum Heliozoa Class Plectomycetes Infrakingdom Ecdysozoa
Phylum Radiozoa Phylum Basidiomycota Superphylum Haemopoda
Subphylum Spasmaria Subphylum Septomycotina Phylum Arthropoda
Subphylum Radiolaria Class Septomycetes Subphylum Chelicerom
Subclass Sporidiomycetidae Infraphylum Pycnogon
Subclass Uredomycetidae Infraphylum Chelicera
Subphylum Orthomycotina Subphylum Trilobitomo
Superclass Hemibasidiomycetia Subphylum Mandibulat
Class Ustomycetes Infraphylum Crustace
Superclass Hymenomycetia Infraphylum Myriapod
Class Gelimycetes Infraphylum Insecta
Subclass Tremellomycetidae Phylum Lobopoda
Subclass Dacrymycetidae Subphylum Onychopho
Subclass Auromycetidae Subphylum Tardigrada
Class Homobasidiomycetes Superphylum Nemathelm
Subclass Clavomycetidae Phylum Nemathelminthe
Subclass Pileomycetidae Subphylum Scalidorhyn
Infraphylum Priapozo
Infraphylum Kinorhyn
Subphylum Nematoida
 Infraphylum Nematod
Infraphylum Nematom
Infrakingdom Platyzoa
Phylum Acanthognatha
Subphylum Trochata
Infraphylum Rotifera
Infraphylum Acanthoce
Subphylum Monokonta
Phylum Platyhelminthes
Subphylum Turbellaria
Infraphylum Mucorhabd
Infraphylum Rhabditop
Subphylum Neodermata
Infraphylum Trematoda
Infraphylum Cercomero
Branch Deuterostomia
Infrakingdom Coelomopo
Phylum Hemichordata
Subphylum Pterobranch
Subphylum Enteropneus
Phylum Echinodermata
Subphylum Homalozoa
Subphylum Pelmatozoa
Infraphylum Blastozoa
Infraphylum Crinozoa
Subphylum Eleutherozo
Infraphylum Asterozoa
Infraphylum Echinozoa
Infrakingdom Chordonia
Phylum Urochorda
Subphylum Tunicata
Infraphylum Ascidiae
Infraphylum Thaliae
Subphylum Appendicula
Phylum Chordata
Subphylum Acraniata
Infraphylum Cephaloch
Infraphylum Conodonta
Subphylum Vertebrata
Infraphylum Agnatha
Infraphylum Gnathosto
Subkingdom Mesozoa
Phylum Mesozoa

Seven kingdoms
Cavalier-Smith and his collaborators revised their classification in 2015. In this scheme they introduced two superkingdoms of Prokaryota and Eukaryota and
seven kingdoms. Prokaryota have two kingdoms: Bacteria and Archaea. (This was based on the consensus in the Taxonomic Outline of Bacteria and Archaea,
and the Catalogue of Life). The Eukaryota have five kingdoms: Protozoa, Chromista, Plantae, Fungi, and Animalia. In this classification a protist is any of the
eukaryotic unicellular organisms.[17]

⁠ Kingdom Bacteria
⁠ ⁠Superkingdom Prokaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Archaea
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Protozoa — e.g. Amoebozoa, Choanozoa, Excavata
⁠

Life ⁠ Kingdom Chromista — e.g. Alveolata, cryptophytes, Heterokonta (Brown Algae, Diatoms etc.), Haptophyta,
⁠ Rhizaria
⁠ ⁠Superkingdom Eukaryota ⁠
⁠ ⁠ Kingdom Plantae — e.g. glaucophytes, red and green algae, land plants
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Fungi
⁠
⁠ Kingdom Animalia
⁠
 ⁠

Summary
Woese et Cavalier-
Linnaeus Haeckel Chatton Copeland Whittaker Woese et al. Cavalier-Smith Ruggiero et al.
al. Smith
1735[23] 1866[24] 1925[25][26] 1938[27][28] 1969[29] 1977[30][31] 1993[33][34][35] 2015[39]
1990[32] 1998[36][37][38]
3 2
— — 2 empires 2 empires 2 empires 2 empires 3 domains 2 empires
superkingdoms superkingdoms
2 3 4 5
— 6 kingdoms — 8 kingdoms 6 kingdoms 7 kingdoms
kingdoms kingdoms kingdoms kingdoms
Eubacteria Bacteria Eubacteria Bacteria
Prokaryota Monera Monera Bacteria
Archaebacteria Archaea Archaebacteria Archaea
— Protista Archezoa
Protozoa Protozoa
Protista Protista Protista Protozoa
Chromista Chromista Chromista
Eukaryota Eucarya
Plantae Plantae Plantae Plantae Plantae
Vegetabilia Plantae Plantae
Fungi Fungi Fungi Fungi Fungi
Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia Animalia
The kingdom-level classification of life is still widely employed as a useful way of grouping organisms, notwithstanding some problems with this approach:

Kingdoms such as Protozoa represent grades rather than clades, and so are rejected by phylogenetic classification systems.
The most recent research does not support the classification of the eukaryotes into any of the standard systems. In 2009, Andrew Roger and
Alastair Simpson emphasized the need for diligence in analyzing new discoveries: "With the current pace of change in our understanding of
the eukaryote tree of life, we should proceed with caution."[40] Kingdoms are rarely used in academic phylogeny and are more common in
introductory education, where 5-6 kingdom models are preferred.[41]

Beyond traditional kingdoms

While the concept of kingdoms continues to be used by some taxonomists, there has been a movement away from traditional kingdoms, as they are no longer
seen as providing a cladistic classification, where there is emphasis in arranging organisms into natural groups.[42]

Three domains of life

Based on RNA studies, Carl Woese thought life could be divided into three large
divisions and referred to them as the "three primary kingdom" model or "urkingdom"
model.[15]

In 1990, the name "domain" was proposed for the highest rank.[5] This term represents
a synonym for the category of dominion (lat. dominium), introduced by Moore in
1974.[43] Unlike Moore, Woese et al. (1990) did not suggest a Latin term for this
category, which represents a further argument supporting the accurately introduced
term dominion.[44]

Woese divided the prokaryotes (previously classified as the Kingdom Monera) into
two groups, called Eubacteria and Archaebacteria, stressing that there was as much
genetic difference between these two groups as between either of them and all A phylogenetic tree based on rRNA data showing Woese's three-domain
eukaryotes. system. All smaller branches can be considered kingdoms.

⁠ Domain Bacteria (Eubacteria)

⁠
Life ⁠ Domain Archaea (Archaebacteria)
⁠ ⁠
⁠ Domain Eukarya (Eukaryota)
⁠
According to genetic data, although eukaryote groups such as plants, fungi, and animals may look different, they are more closely related to each other than
they are to either the Eubacteria or Archaea. It was also found that the eukaryotes are more closely related to the Archaea than they are to the Eubacteria.
Although the primacy of the Eubacteria-Archaea divide has been questioned, it has been upheld by subsequent research.[22] There is no consensus on how many
kingdoms exist in the classification scheme proposed by Woese.

Eukaryotic supergroups

In 2004, a review article by Simpson and Roger noted that the Protista were "a grab-bag for all eukaryotes that are not animals, plants or fungi". They held that
only monophyletic groups should be accepted as formal ranks in a classification and that – while this approach had been impractical previously (necessitating
"literally dozens of eukaryotic 'kingdoms' ") – it had now become possible to divide the eukaryotes into "just a few major groups that are probably all
monophyletic".[42]

On this basis, the diagram opposite (redrawn from their article) showed the real "kingdoms" (their quotation marks) of the eukaryotes.[42] A classification which
followed this approach was produced in 2005 for the International Society of Protistologists, by a committee which "worked in collaboration with specialists
from many societies". It divided the eukaryotes into the same six "supergroups".[45] The published classification deliberately did not use formal taxonomic
ranks, including that of "kingdom".

⁠D ⁠ omain Bacteria ⁠ prokaryotic Bacteria

⁠ ⁠ ⁠
⁠ ⁠Domain Archaea ⁠ prokaryotic Archaeans
⁠ ⁠ ⁠
⁠Excavata various flagellate protozoa
⁠
⁠ Amoebozoa most lobose amoeboids and slime moulds
⁠
Life ⁠ Opisthokonta animals, fungi, choanoflagellates, etc.
⁠ ⁠
⁠D⁠ omain Eukaryota ⁠ Rhizaria Foraminifera, Radiolaria, and various other amoeboid protozoa
⁠ ⁠ ⁠

⁠ Chromalveolata Stramenopiles (Brown Algae, Diatoms, etc.), Haptophyta, Cryptophyta (or

⁠ cryptomonads), and Alveolata

⁠ Archaeplastida (or Primoplantae) Land plants, green algae, red algae, and glaucophytes
⁠
In this system the multicellular animals (Metazoa) are descended from the same ancestor as
both the unicellular choanoflagellates and the fungi which form the Opisthokonta.[45] Plants
are thought to be more distantly related to animals and fungi.

However, in the same year as the International Society of Protistologists' classification was
published (2005), doubts were being expressed as to whether some of these supergroups
were monophyletic, particularly the Chromalveolata,[46] and a review in 2006 noted the lack
of evidence for several of the six proposed supergroups.[47]

As of 2019, there is widespread agreement that the Rhizaria belong with the Stramenopiles
and the Alveolata, in a clade dubbed the SAR supergroup,[48] so that Rhizaria is not one of
the main eukaryote groups.[20][49][50][51][52] One hypothesis of eukaryotic relationships depicted by Alastair
Simpson

Comparison of top level classification

Some authors have added non-cellular life to their classifications. This can create a "superdomain" called "Acytota", also called "Aphanobionta", of non-cellular
life; with the other superdomain being "cytota" or cellular life.[53][54] The eocyte hypothesis proposes that the eukaryotes emerged from a phylum within the
archaea called the Thermoproteota (formerly known as eocytes or Crenarchaeota).[55][56]

Taxonomical root Two superdomains Three Five

node (controversial)
Two empires
domains Five Dominiums[57] kingdoms
Six kingdoms Eocyte hypothesis

Virusobiota (Viruses,
Acytota / Aphanobionta Viroids)
non-cellular life
Prionobiota (Prions)
Prokaryota / Bacteria Bacteria Eubacteria Bacteria
Procarya Monera
Biota / Vitae / Life (Monera) Archaea Archaea Archaebacteria

Cytota Protista
cellular life Archaea including
Fungi eukaryotes
Eukaryota / Eukarya
Plantae

Animalia

Viruses
The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses uses the taxonomic rank "kingdom" in the classification of viruses (with the suffix -virae); but this is
beneath the top level classifications of realm and subrealm.[58]

There is ongoing debate as to whether viruses can be included in the tree of life. The arguments against include the fact that they are obligate intracellular
parasites that lack metabolism and are not capable of replication outside of a host cell.[59][60] Another argument is that their placement in the tree would be
problematic, since it is suspected that viruses have various evolutionary origins,[59] and they have a penchant for harvesting nucleotide sequences from their
hosts.
On the other hand, there are arguments in favor of their inclusion.[61] One of these comes from the discovery of unusually large and complex viruses, such as
Mimivirus, that possess typical cellular genes.[62]

See also
Biology portal

Cladistics
Phylogenetics
Systematics
Taxonomy

Notes
a. Compared to the version Cavalier-Smith published in 2004, the alveolates and the rhizarians have been moved from Kingdom Protozoa to
Kingdom Chromista.

References
1. "IUCN SSC acceptance of Fauna Flora Funga" ([Link] 9. Sapp, J. (2005). "The Prokaryote-Eukaryote Dichotomy: Meanings
org/web/20211111141833/[Link] and Mythology" ([Link]
[Link]) (PDF). Fungal Conservation Committee, IUCN SSC. 7417). Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 69 (2): 292–
2021. Archived from the original ([Link] 305. doi:10.1128/MMBR.69.2.292-305.2005 ([Link]
s/[Link]) (PDF) on 2021-11-11. Retrieved 2022-03-04. 8%2FMMBR.69.2.292-305.2005). PMC 1197417 ([Link]
"The IUCN Species Survival Commission calls for the due [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC1197417). PMID 15944457 ([Link]
recognition of fungi as major components of biodiversity in [Link]/15944457).
legislation and policy. It fully endorses the Fauna Flora Funga 10. Stanier, R.Y. & Van Neil, C.B. (1962). "The concept of a bacterium".
Initiative and asks that the phrases animals and plants and fauna Archiv für Mikrobiologie. 42 (1): 17–35. doi:10.1007/BF00425185 (h
and flora be replaced with animals, fungi, and plants and fauna, ttps://[Link]/10.1007%2FBF00425185). PMID 13916221 ([Link]
flora, and funga." [Link]/13916221). S2CID 29859498 ([Link]
2. "Re:wild and IUCN SSC become first global organizations to call for [Link]/CorpusID:29859498).
the recognition of fungi as one of three kingdoms of life critical to 11. Whittaker, R.H. (January 1969). "New concepts of kingdoms or
protecting and restoring Earth" ([Link] organisms. Evolutionary relations are better represented by new
survival-commission/202108/rewild-and-iucn-ssc-become-first-glob classifications than by the traditional two kingdoms". Science. 163
al-organizations-call-recognition-fungi-one-three-kingdoms-life-critic (3863): 150–60. Bibcode:1969Sci...163..150W ([Link]
al-protecting-and-restoring-earth). International Union for [Link]/abs/1969Sci...163..150W). CiteSeerX [Link].5430 (h
Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 3 August 2021. ttps://[Link]/viewdoc/summary?doi=[Link].543
3. Linnaeus, C. (1735). Systemae Naturae, sive regna tria naturae, 0). doi:10.1126/science.163.3863.150 ([Link]
systematics proposita per classes, ordines, genera & species. cience.163.3863.150). PMID 5762760 ([Link]
4. See e.g. McNeill, J.; et al., eds. (2006). International Code of gov/5762760).
Botanical Nomenclature (Vienna Code) adopted by the 12. Margulis L, Chapman MJ (2009-03-19). Kingdoms and Domains:
Seventeenth International Botanical Congress, Vienna, Austria, July An Illustrated Guide to the Phyla of Life on Earth ([Link]
2005 ([Link] [Link]/books?id=9IWaqAOGyt4C). Academic Press. p. 10.
k/icbn/[Link]) (electronic ed.). Vienna: International Association ISBN 9780080920146 – via Google Books.
for Plant Taxonomy. Archived from the original ([Link] 13. Case, Emily (2008-10-01). "Teaching Taxonomy: How Many
n/[Link]) on 6 October 2012. Retrieved 2011-02-20., "article 3.1" Kingdoms?" ([Link] American Biology
([Link] Teacher. 70 (8): 472–477. doi:10.2307/30163328 ([Link]
5. Woese, C.R.; Kandler, O.; Wheelis, M.L. (1990). "Towards a natural 0.2307%2F30163328). JSTOR 30163328 ([Link]
systs: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya" (ht ble/30163328). Retrieved 2020-07-28.
tps://[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC54159). Proceedings 14. Palmer, E. Laurence; Fowler, Seymour H. (January 1975).
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Fieldbook of Natural History ([Link]
America. 87 (12): 4576–9. Bibcode:1990PNAS...87.4576W (https:// atur00palm) (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-070-48425-2.
[Link]/abs/1990PNAS...87.4576W). 15. Balch, W.E.; Magrum, L.J.; Fox, G.E.; Wolfe, C.R. & Woese, C.R.
doi:10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576 ([Link]
(August 1977). "An ancient divergence among the bacteria".
2.4576). PMC 54159 ([Link] Journal of Molecular Evolution. 9 (4): 305–311.
C54159). PMID 2112744 ([Link]
Bibcode:1977JMolE...9..305B ([Link]
4).
77JMolE...9..305B). doi:10.1007/BF01796092 ([Link]
6. Cavalier-Smith, T. (1998). "A revised six-kingdom system of life" (htt 07%2FBF01796092). PMID 408502 ([Link]
p://[Link]/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online ov/408502). S2CID 27788891 ([Link]
&aid=685). Biological Reviews. 73 (3): 203–66. doi:10.1111/j.1469- usID:27788891).
185X.1998.tb00030.x ([Link]
16. "The Six Kingdoms" ([Link]
8.tb00030.x). PMID 9809012 ([Link]
[Link]
012). S2CID 6557779 ([Link]
[Link]. Rhode Island College. Archived from the original (htt
57779).
p://[Link]/faculty/ptiskus/six_kingdoms/[Link]) on 2021-
7. Singer, Charles J. (1931). A short history of biology, a general 05-10. Retrieved 2020-07-25.
introduction to the study of living things. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
OCLC 1197036 ([Link]
8. Scamardella, Joseph M. (1999). "Not plants or animals: a brief
history of the origin of Kingdoms Protozoa, Protista and
Protoctista". International Microbiology. 2 (4): 207–16.
PMID 10943416 ([Link]
17. Ruggiero, Michael A.; Gordon, Dennis P.; Orrell, Thomas M.; Bailly, 31. Woese, C.R.; Fox, G.E. (November 1977). "Phylogenetic structure
Nicolas; Bourgoin, Thierry; Brusca, Richard C.; Cavalier-Smith, of the prokaryotic domain: the primary kingdoms" ([Link]
Thomas; Guiry, Michael D.; Kirk, Paul M.; Thuesen, Erik V. (2015). [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC432104). Proceedings of the National
"A higher level classification of all living organisms" ([Link] Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 74 (11):
[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC4418965). PLOS ONE. 10 (4): 5088–5090. Bibcode:1977PNAS...74.5088W ([Link]
e0119248. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1019248R ([Link] [Link]/abs/1977PNAS...74.5088W). doi:10.1073/pnas.74.11.5088
[Link]/abs/2015PLoSO..1019248R). ([Link] PMC 432104 (http
doi:10.1371/[Link].0119248 ([Link] s://[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC432104). PMID 270744
[Link].0119248). PMC 4418965 ([Link] ([Link]
c/articles/PMC4418965). PMID 25923521 ([Link] 32. Woese, C.; Kandler, O.; Wheelis, M. (1990). "Towards a natural
[Link]/25923521). system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria,
18. Cavalier-Smith, Thomas (March 26, 1987). "Eucaryotes with no and Eucarya" ([Link]
mitochondria". Nature. 326 (6111): 332–333. 9). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
Bibcode:1987Natur.326..332C ([Link] States of America. 87 (12): 4576–4579.
987Natur.326..332C). doi:10.1038/326332a0 ([Link] Bibcode:1990PNAS...87.4576W ([Link]
8%2F326332a0). PMID 3561476 ([Link] 1990PNAS...87.4576W). doi:10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576 ([Link]
3561476). S2CID 4351363 ([Link] rg/10.1073%2Fpnas.87.12.4576). PMC 54159 ([Link]
D:4351363). [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC54159). PMID 2112744 ([Link]
19. Poole, Anthony; Penny, David (21 June 2007). "Engulfed by [Link]/2112744).
speculation" ([Link] 33. Cavalier-Smith, T. (1981). "Eukaryote kingdoms: Seven or nine?".
[Link]/~cewinter/aulas/artigos/2007/eukarya_orig.pdf) Bio Systems. 14 (3–4): 461–481. doi:10.1016/0303-2647(81)90050-
(PDF). Nature. 447 (7147): 913. doi:10.1038/447913a ([Link] 2 ([Link]
g/10.1038%2F447913a). PMID 17581566 ([Link] PMID 7337818 ([Link]
[Link]/17581566). S2CID 7753492 ([Link] 34. Cavalier-Smith, T. (1992). "Origins of secondary metabolism". Ciba
g/CorpusID:7753492). Archived from the original ([Link] Foundation Symposium. Novartis Foundation Symposia. 171: 64–
[Link]/~cewinter/aulas/artigos/2007/eukarya_orig.pdf) (PDF) on 6 80, discussion 80–7. doi:10.1002/9780470514344.ch5 ([Link]
July 2011. Retrieved 15 March 2011. rg/10.1002%2F9780470514344.ch5). ISBN 9780470514344.
20. Cavalier-Smith, Thomas (2009). "Kingdoms Protozoa and PMID 1302186 ([Link]
Chromista and the eozoan root of the eukaryotic tree" ([Link] 35. Cavalier-Smith, T. (1993). "Kingdom protozoa and its 18 phyla" (http
[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC2880060). Biology Letters. 6 (3): s://[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC372943). Microbiological
342–345. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0948 ([Link] Reviews. 57 (4): 953–994. doi:10.1128/mmbr.57.4.953-994.1993 (h
bl.2009.0948). PMC 2880060 ([Link] ttps://[Link]/10.1128%2Fmmbr.57.4.953-994.1993). PMC 372943
icles/PMC2880060). PMID 20031978 ([Link] ([Link]
gov/20031978). PMID 8302218 ([Link]
21. Cavalier-Smith, T. (2004). "Only six kingdoms of life" ([Link] 36. Cavalier-Smith, T. (1998). "A revised six-kingdom system of life" (htt
[Link]/protozoa/cavalier-smith_2004_prs.pdf) (PDF). p://[Link]/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B. 271 (1545): 1251– &aid=685). Biological Reviews. 73 (3): 203–266.
1262. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2705 ([Link] doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1998.tb00030.x ([Link]
b.2004.2705). PMC 1691724 ([Link] 2Fj.1469-185X.1998.tb00030.x). PMID 9809012 ([Link]
cles/PMC1691724). PMID 15306349 ([Link] [Link]/9809012). S2CID 6557779 ([Link]
ov/15306349). Retrieved 29 April 2010. [Link]/CorpusID:6557779).
22. Dagan, T.; Roettger, M.; Bryant & Martin, W. (2010). "Genome 37. Cavalier-Smith, T. (2004). "Only six kingdoms of life" ([Link]
Networks Root the Tree of Life between Prokaryotic Domains" (http [Link]/protozoa/cavalier-smith_2004_prs.pdf) (PDF).
s://[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC2997548). Genome Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 271
Biology and Evolution. 2: 379–92. doi:10.1093/gbe/evq025 (https:// (1545): 1251–1262. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2705 ([Link]
[Link]/10.1093%2Fgbe%2Fevq025). PMC 2997548 ([Link] 1098%2Frspb.2004.2705). PMC 1691724 ([Link]
[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC2997548). PMID 20624742 (http [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC1691724). PMID 15306349 ([Link]
s://[Link]/20624742). [Link]/15306349). Retrieved 2010-04-29.
23. Linnaeus, C. (1735). Systemae Naturae, sive regna tria naturae, 38. Cavalier-Smith, T. (June 2010). "Kingdoms Protozoa and Chromista
systematics proposita per classes, ordines, genera & species. and the eozoan root of the eukaryotic tree" ([Link]
24. Haeckel, E. (1866). Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. [Link]/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=20031978). Biol.
Reimer, Berlin. Lett. 6 (3): 342–345. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0948 ([Link]
25. Chatton, É. (1925). "Pansporella perplexa. Réflexions sur la 1098%2Frsbl.2009.0948). PMC 2880060 ([Link]
biologie et la phylogénie des protozoaires" ([Link] gov/pmc/articles/PMC2880060). PMID 20031978 ([Link]
12148/bpt6k55415433/f8). Annales des Sciences Naturelles - [Link]/20031978).
Zoologie et Biologie Animale. 10-VIII: 5–84. 39. Ruggiero, Michael A.; Gordon, Dennis P.; Orrell, Thomas M.; Bailly,
26. Chatton, É. (1937). Titres et Travaux Scientifiques (1906–1937). E. Nicolas; Bourgoin, Thierry; Brusca, Richard C.; Cavalier-Smith,
Sottano, Sète, France. Thomas; Guiry, Michael D.; Kirk, Paul M.; Thuesen, Erik V. (2015).
"A higher level classification of all living organisms" ([Link]
27. Copeland, H.F. (1938). "The kingdoms of organisms". Quarterly
[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC4418965). PLOS ONE. 10 (4):
Review of Biology. 13 (4): 383–420. doi:10.1086/394568 ([Link]
e0119248. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1019248R ([Link]
[Link]/10.1086%2F394568). S2CID 84634277 ([Link]
[Link]/abs/2015PLoSO..1019248R).
[Link]/CorpusID:84634277).
doi:10.1371/[Link].0119248 ([Link]
28. Copeland, H.F. (1956). The Classification of Lower Organisms (http [Link].0119248). PMC 4418965 ([Link]
s://[Link]/stream/classificationof00cope#page/6/mode/2up). c/articles/PMC4418965). PMID 25923521 ([Link]
Palo Alto: Pacific Books. p. 6. doi:10.5962/[Link].4474 ([Link] [Link]/25923521).
org/10.5962%[Link].4474).
40. Roger, A.J. & Simpson, A.G.B. (2009). "Evolution: Revisiting the
29. Whittaker, R.H. (January 1969). "New concepts of kingdoms of Root of the Eukaryote Tree" ([Link]
organisms". Science. 163 (3863): 150–160. 12.032). Current Biology. 19 (4): R165–7.
Bibcode:1969Sci...163..150W ([Link] doi:10.1016/[Link].2008.12.032 ([Link]
69Sci...163..150W). doi:10.1126/science.163.3863.150 ([Link] 08.12.032). PMID 19243692 ([Link]
org/10.1126%2Fscience.163.3863.150). PMID 5762760 ([Link] 3692). S2CID 13172971 ([Link]
[Link]/5762760). 13172971).
30. Woese, C.R.; Balch, W.E.; Magrum, L.J.; Fox, G.E.; Wolfe, R.S. 41. "The 6 Kingdoms of Life" ([Link]
(August 1977). "An ancient divergence among the bacteria". of-life-373414). ThoughtCo. Retrieved 2024-12-29.
Journal of Molecular Evolution. 9 (4): 305–311.
Bibcode:1977JMolE...9..305B ([Link]
77JMolE...9..305B). doi:10.1007/BF01796092 ([Link]
07%2FBF01796092). PMID 408502 ([Link]
ov/408502). S2CID 27788891 ([Link]
usID:27788891).
42. Simpson, Alastair G.B.; Roger, Andrew J. (2004). "The real 52. Hackett, J.D.; Yoon, H.S.; Li, S.; Reyes-Prieto, A.; Rummele, S.E. &
'kingdoms' of eukaryotes" ([Link] Bhattacharya, D. (2007). "Phylogenomic analysis supports the
8.038). Current Biology. 14 (17): R693 – R696. monophyly of cryptophytes and haptophytes and the association of
doi:10.1016/[Link].2004.08.038 ([Link] Rhizaria with chromalveolates" ([Link]
04.08.038). PMID 15341755 ([Link] v%2Fmsm089). Molecular Biology and Evolution. 24 (8): 1702–
1755). S2CID 207051421 ([Link] 1713. doi:10.1093/molbev/msm089 ([Link]
D:207051421). bev%2Fmsm089). PMID 17488740 ([Link]
43. Moore, R.T. (1974). "Proposal for the recognition of super ranks" (ht v/17488740).
tp://[Link]/historic/Congress/IBC_1975/Prop034bis-03 53. Trifonov EN, Kejnovsky E (2016). "Acytota - associated kingdom of
[Link]) (PDF). Taxon. 23 (4): 650–652. doi:10.2307/1218807 (https:// neglected life" ([Link] J
[Link]/10.2307%2F1218807). JSTOR 1218807 ([Link] Biomol Struct Dyn. 34 (8): 1641–8.
rg/stable/1218807). doi:10.1080/07391102.2015.1086959 ([Link]
44. Luketa, S. (2012). "New views on the megaclassification of life" (htt 7391102.2015.1086959). PMID 26305806 ([Link]
p://[Link]/num7_4/luketa_protistology_7-[Link]) (PDF). [Link]/26305806). S2CID 38178747 ([Link]
Protistology. 7 (4): 218–237. [Link]/CorpusID:38178747).
45. Adl SM, Simpson AGB, Farmer MA, Andersen RA, Anderson OR, 54. Minelli, Alessandro (1993). Biological systematics: The state of the
Barta JR, et al. (2005). "The new higher-level classification of art. London: Chapman & Hall. ISBN 0-412-36440-9.
eukaryotes with emphasis on the taxonomy of protists" ([Link] OCLC 27895507 ([Link]
[Link]/record/14409/files/PAL_E1847.pdf) (PDF). Journal of 55. Archibald, John M. (23 December 2008). "The eocyte hypothesis
Eukaryotic Microbiology. 52 (5): 399–451. doi:10.1111/j.1550- and the origin of eukaryotic cells" ([Link]
7408.2005.00053.x ([Link] c/articles/PMC2629348). PNAS. 105 (51): 20049–20050.
0053.x). PMID 16248873 ([Link] Bibcode:2008PNAS..10520049A ([Link]
3). S2CID 8060916 ([Link] s/2008PNAS..10520049A). doi:10.1073/pnas.0811118106 ([Link]
916). [Link]/10.1073%2Fpnas.0811118106). PMC 2629348 ([Link]
46. Harper, J.T.; Waanders, E. & Keeling, P.J. (2005). "On the [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC2629348). PMID 19091952 (http
monophyly of chromalveolates using a six-protein phylogeny of s://[Link]/19091952).
eukaryotes" ([Link] International 56. Lake, James A.; Henderson, Eric; Oakes, Melanie; Clark, Michael
Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 55 (Pt 1): W. (June 1984). "Eocytes: A new ribosome structure indicates a
487–496. doi:10.1099/ijs.0.63216-0 ([Link] kingdom with a close relationship to eukaryotes" ([Link]
0.63216-0). PMID 15653923 ([Link] [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC345305). PNAS. 81 (12): 3786–3790.
3923). Bibcode:1984PNAS...81.3786L ([Link]
47. Parfrey, Laura W.; Barbero, Erika; Lasser, Elyse; Dunthorn, Micah; 1984PNAS...81.3786L). doi:10.1073/pnas.81.12.3786 ([Link]
Bhattacharya, Debashish; Patterson, David J. & Katz, Laura A. g/10.1073%2Fpnas.81.12.3786). PMC 345305 ([Link]
(2006). "Evaluating support for the current classification of [Link]/pmc/articles/PMC345305). PMID 6587394 ([Link]
eukaryotic diversity" ([Link] [Link]/6587394).
C1713255). PLOS Genetics. 2 (12): e220. 57. Luketa, Stefan (2012). "New views on the megaclassification of life"
doi:10.1371/[Link].0020220 ([Link] ([Link]
[Link].0020220). PMC 1713255 ([Link] [Link]) (PDF). Protistology. 7 (4): 218–237.
c/articles/PMC1713255). PMID 17194223 ([Link] 58. "ICTV Code" ([Link] [Link].
[Link]/17194223). International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Retrieved 26 April
48. Burki et al. 2007, p. 4 2020.
49. Burki, Fabien; Shalchian-Tabrizi, Kamran; Minge, Marianne; 59. Moreira, David; Purificación López-García (2009). "Ten reasons to
Skjæveland, Åsmund; Nikolaev, Sergey I.; Jakobsen, Kjetill S. & exclude viruses from the tree of life". Nature Reviews Microbiology.
Pawlowski, Jan (2007). Butler, Geraldine (ed.). "Phylogenomics 7 (4): 306–311. doi:10.1038/nrmicro2108 ([Link]
reshuffles the eukaryotic supergroups" ([Link] 2Fnrmicro2108). PMID 19270719 ([Link]
v/pmc/articles/PMC1949142). PLOS ONE. 2 (8): e790. 19270719). S2CID 3907750 ([Link]
Bibcode:2007PLoSO...2..790B ([Link] sID:3907750).
007PLoSO...2..790B). doi:10.1371/[Link].0000790 ([Link] 60. Luketa, Stefan (2012). "New views on the megaclassification of life"
[Link]/10.1371%[Link].0000790). PMC 1949142 ([Link] ([Link]
[Link]/pmc/articles/PMC1949142). PMID 17726520 (htt (PDF). Protistology. 7 (4): 218–237.
ps://[Link]/17726520).
61. Hegde, Nagendra; Maddur, Mohan S.; Kaveri, Srini V. & Bayry,
50. Burki, Fabien; Shalchian-Tabrizi, Kamran & Pawlowski, Jan (2008). Jagadeesh (2009). "Reasons to include viruses in the tree of life" (h
"Phylogenomics reveals a new 'megagroup' including most ttps://[Link]/10.1038%2Fnrmicro2108-c1). Nature Reviews
photosynthetic eukaryotes" ([Link] Microbiology. 7 (8): 615. doi:10.1038/nrmicro2108-c1 ([Link]
es/PMC2610160). Biology Letters. 4 (4): 366–369. g/10.1038%2Fnrmicro2108-c1). PMID 19561628 ([Link]
doi:10.1098/rsbl.2008.0224 ([Link] [Link]/19561628).
224). PMC 2610160 ([Link] 62. Raoult, Didier; Audic, Stéphane; Robert, Catherine; Abergel,
C2610160). PMID 18522922 ([Link]
Chantal; Renesto, Patricia; Ogata, Hiroyuki; La Scola, Bernard;
2922). Suzan, Marie; Claverie, Jean-Michel (2004). "The 1.2 megabase
51. Burki, F.; Inagaki, Y.; Brate, J.; Archibald, J.M.; Keeling, P.J.; genome sequence of Mimivirus". Science. 306 (5700): 1344–1350.
Cavalier-Smith, T.; Sakaguchi, M.; Hashimoto, T.; et al. (2009). Bibcode:2004Sci...306.1344R ([Link]
"Large-scale phylogenomic analyses reveal that two enigmatic 04Sci...306.1344R). doi:10.1126/science.1101485 ([Link]
protist lineages, Telonemia and Centroheliozoa, are related to 0.1126%2Fscience.1101485). PMID 15486256 ([Link]
photosynthetic Chromalveolates" ([Link] [Link]/15486256). S2CID 84298461 ([Link]
c/articles/PMC2817417). Genome Biology and Evolution. 1: 231– [Link]/CorpusID:84298461).
238. doi:10.1093/gbe/evp022 ([Link]
vp022). PMC 2817417 ([Link]
MC2817417). PMID 20333193 ([Link]
333193).

Further reading
Pelentier, B. (2007-2015). Empire Biota: a comprehensive taxonomy, [1] ([Link]
[Link]/). [Historical overview.]
 Peter H. Raven and Helena Curtis (1970), Biology of Plants, New York: Worth Publishers. [Early presentation of five-kingdom system.]

External links
A Brief History of the Kingdoms of Life ([Link] at Earthling
Nature
The five kingdom concept ([Link] Archived ([Link]
[Link] 2021-11-07 at the Wayback Machine
Whittaker's classification ([Link]

Retrieved from "[Link]