Reference health

Phylogenetic species concepts

https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-g

12/12 checkable references clean · checked 2026-07-22

Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.

3 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.

The 12 checked references that resolve

resolves10.1007/978-1-4615-6781-3_6

Species Concepts and Speciation Analysis

resolves10.1007/BF00128837

Species concepts and the ontology of evolution

resolves10.2307/3243026

A Critique of the Biological Species Concept and Recommendations for a Phylogenetic Alternative

resolves10.1111/j.1096-0031.1990.tb00526.x

ANOTHER WAY OF <i>LOOKING AT</i> THE SPECIES PROBLEM: A REPLY TO DE QUEIROZ AND DONOGHUE

resolves10.1111/j.1096-0031.1990.tb00541.x

AN AMPLIFICATION OF THE PHYLOGENETIC SPECIES CONCEPT

resolves10.2307/2419335

Isozyme Variation and Species Delimitation in the Puccinellia nuttalliana Complex (Poaceae): An Application of the Phylogenetic Species Concept

resolves10.1111/j.1096-0031.1988.tb00518.x

PHYLOGENETIC SYSTEMATICS AND THE SPECIES PROBLEM

resolves10.1111/j.1096-0031.1990.tb00525.x

PHYLOGENETIC SYSTEMATICS OR NELSON'S VERSION OF CLADISTICS?

resolves10.1007/BF00144036

The cladistic solution to the species problem

resolves10.1007/BF00127698

Individuality, pluralism, and the phylogenetic species concept

resolves10.1111/j.1096-0031.1989.tb00490.x

CLADISTICS AND EVOLUTIONARY MODELS

resolves10.1007/BF02207381

A commentary on Ridley's cladistic solution to the species problem

The 3 references without a DOI — listed, not checked

no DOI — not checked10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-G_BIB3

no DOI — not checked10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-G_BIB5

no DOI — not checked10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-G_BIB13

What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings, or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.

checked 2026-07-22 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record

view as graph · paper page

Embed this badge

Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.

<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-g"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-g/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>

[![CiteStamped reference-health badge](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-g/badge.svg)](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1016/0169-5347(92)90187-g)