Kingdom (biology)
In
biology, a
kingdom or
regnum is the top-level, or nearly the top-level,
taxon of organisms in
scientific classification.
In his
Systema Naturae, first published in 1735,
Carolus Linnaeus distinguished two kingdoms of living things: Animalia for
animals and Vegetabilia for
plants (Linnaeus also treated
minerals, placing them in a third kingdom, Mineralia). Linnaeus divided each kingdom into classes, later grouped into
phyla for animals and
divisions for plants.
When single-celled organisms were first discovered, they were split between the two kingdoms: mobile forms in the animal phylum
Protozoa, and colored
algae and
bacteria in the plant division Thallophyta or Protophyta. However, a number of forms were hard to place, or were placed in different kingdoms by different authors: for example, the mobile alga
Euglena and the amoeba-like
slime moulds. As a result,
Ernst Haeckel suggested creating a third kingdom
Protista for them.
The discovery that
bacteria have a radically different cell structure from other organisms â€" bacteria are contained in a single
membrane, whereas other organisms have a more complex structure with a
nucleus and other
organelles divided by intracellular membranes â€" led Chatton to propose a division of life into two empires: organisms with a nucleus in
Eukaryota and organisms without in
Prokaryota.
Chatton's proposal was not taken up immediately; a more typical system was that of
Herbert Copeland, who gave the prokaryotes a separate kingdom, originally called Mychota but later referred to as
Monera or Bacteria
. Copeland's four-kingdom system placed all eukaryotes other than animals and plants in the kingdom
Protoctista .
It gradually became apparent how important the prokaryote/eukaryote distinction is, and Stanier and van Niel popularized Chatton's two-empire system in the 1960s
.
Robert Whittaker recognized an additional kingdom for the
Fungi. The resulting
five-kingdom system, proposed in 1969, has become a popular standard and with some refinement is still used in many works, or forms the basis for newer multi-kingdom systems. It is based mainly on 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
.
In the years around 180 there was an emphasis on
phylogeny and redefining the kingdoms to be
monophyletic. The Animalia, Plantae, and Fungi were generally reduced to core groups of closely related forms, and the others thrown into the Protista. Based on
rRNA studies
Carl Woese divided the prokaryotes into two kingdoms, called
Eubacteria and
Archaebacteria. Such
six-kingdom systems have become standard in many works
.
A variety of new eukaryotic kingdoms were also proposed, but most were quickly invalidated, ranked down to phyla or classes, or abandoned. The only one which is still in common use is the kingdom
Chromista proposed by
Cavalier-Smith, including organisms such as
kelp,
diatoms, and
water moulds. Thus the eukaryotes are divided into three primarily heterotrophic groups, the Animalia, Fungi, and Protozoa, and two primarily photosynthetic groups, the Plantae (including
red algae) and Chromista. However, it has not become widely used because of uncertainty over the monophyly of the latter two kingdoms.
In 1990,
Carl Woese proposed that the Eubacteria, Archaebacteria, and Eukaryota represent three primary lines of descent and accordingly he promoted them to domains, naming them
Bacteria,
Archaea, and
Eucarya . This
three-domain system has received notable criticism but has generally displaced the older two-empire system as a way of organizing kingdoms together
.
(Note that the equivalences in this table are not perfect. For example, Haeckel placed the
red algae (Haeckel's Florideae; modern
Florideophyceae) and
blue-green algae (Haeckel's Archephyta; modern
Cyanobacteria) in his Plantae, but in modern classifications they are considered protists and bacteria respectively. However, despite this and other failures of equivalence, the table gives a useful simplification.)