Taxonomy Memorization

[OhFace]

I'm looking for others' opinions, so I hope I've put this in the right forum.

Here's the deal. I have a Biology test coming up, the majority of which is going to be based on a lot of taxonomy memorization. For those of you who already have this vast amount of information miraculously crammed into your brains, do you have any suggestions on memorization techniques? As I look at these pages and pages of taxonomic information my head begins to spin. In hopes of keeping it attached, I thought I'd come to you all for any suggestions. Or maybe a pill that will implant it all into my brain.

*To be a little more specific, I have to know some, but not all, of the phylum for fungi and animalia. Also be able to describe the characteristics of these phylum.

[Aragowyn]

wow, I remember when I had to do that years ago, several times over for various bio & ecology classes.

My trick, and this helps you memorize both the taxonomic name AND some features of that taxa, was to come up with some clue or mneumonic where the spelling of the taxonomic name triggers a little memory about something unique about that taxa.

And sometimes, the mneumonic is simply in the name of the taxa, like if the name was derived from the latin word(s) descirbing the unique thing(s) about that taxa.

I'll try explaining by giving some examples. Here are a few phyla in Kingdom Animalia and the animals in that phyla, and the little clues I use to help me remember what they are.

Annelida (worms)- sounds like ANNIE, my friend who has really short pudgy fingers, fingers like little fat WORMS; so annelida is the phylum for worms, or animals with segmented bodies.

Arthropoda (insects, spiders, crabs) - those poor creatures with so many legs and joints must get ARTHRitis when they get old; so arthropoda is the phylum for multiple legged animals.

Chordata (Chordates. including vertebrates) - easy one; the spinal CORD.

Cnidaria (Jellyfish, corals) - these creatures like to CNIK (sneak) up on you and sting you; so Cnidaria (the c is really silent) are animals with stinging cells

Echinodermata (Sea Urchins, Starfish) - somehow I could always simply memorize this one as Echino=spiny and Derm=skin; sorry if that doesn't help you much.

Nematoda (Nematodes, round worms) - these guys are a NEMESIS, because round worms can live in the intestine for years without the host knowing it.

Platyhelminthes (Flat worms) - the flatworms are the cute ones with the little eyes inside a little helmet-shaped head, so FLAT=>PLATY and HELMET=HELMINTHES

Porifera (Sponges) - easy one; the sponges have all those holes, like pores.

Anyway, you get the picture.

Oh, and it also helps to just keep reciting all those strange taxonomic words aloud over and over. Really. Just keep saying platyhelminthes platyhelminthes platyhelminthes (for like, a minute) and after that you'll feel you grew up knowing the word. After all, I don't know how much credit you'll get if on your answer sheet you write 'the flatworms are in that platy-helmet-whatever phylum'.

[OhFace]

Thanks, that list is great!!! I'm definitely going to print that list and use it for a study guide. I find that I can remember things much more easily if I make up odd little study devices like that too, that you just have to remember when you see the word.

If anyone has any more lists/advice bring it on. I am slowly beginning to feel better about studying all of this.

[MaxTheVool]

Mnemonics are helpful, but they're not nearly as helpful as understanding the evolutionary basis for the taxonomic system you're learning about. I take it that you're learning about pretty high-level taxa. Like, say, the major phyla of animals.

Being able to see all that biodiversity as a set of patterns in body plan changes is really, really helpful. That way, you can see the patterns in the evolutionary history you're interested in learning, and you won't have to rely so much on blind memorization. Do you understand the developmental differences used to come up with the taxonomy you have to learn? If you're learning about the really high-level classification of animals, do you understand the different patterns of cell cleavage, the different types of body symmetries formed, the different paths taken by each major tissue layer (if there are true tissues), segmentation vs. non-segmentation, etc.?

Oh, BTW, if you have more questions about this, you can e-mail me. I'm posting from MaxTheVool's computer, but this is Scribble writing this post.

Best of luck!

[OhFace]

Thanks Scribble You are right, if I understand the whole concept then it will be easier to remember what phylum possesses which characteristics. I actually do have to know all of the information you posted also; which attributes each phylum has, such as how they reproduce, what specific body parts are unique to them, etc. It's a lot of detail to remember, but hopefully if I read it and try to find a pattern then it will be a little easier.

It's basically a self-taught class, hence my request for opinions on how to learn the material best. My teacher simply posts our notes to print before class, then reads them to us in lecture. This teaching method does absolutely nothing for me.

[emekthian]

The best way to do this, I've found, is to become fluent in Latin and Greek

[Darwin's Finch]

Originally Posted by OhFace

Thanks Scribble You are right, if I understand the whole concept then it will be easier to remember what phylum possesses which characteristics. I actually do have to know all of the information you posted also; which attributes each phylum has, such as how they reproduce, what specific body parts are unique to them, etc. It's a lot of detail to remember, but hopefully if I read it and try to find a pattern then it will be a little easier.

Simplified phylogenetic trees, such as this one (there's also one for fungi), can help a lot with identifying the evolutionary patterns, and thereby getting a good handle on which groups have which traits. I've never been good at memorization, so I prefer to take the "understand it all" route. Once you understand, it becomes almost impossible to forget.

[Gymnopithys]

Originally Posted by OhFace

I'm looking for others' opinions, so I hope I've put this in the right forum.

Here's the deal. I have a Biology test coming up, the majority of which is going to be based on a lot of taxonomy memorization. For those of you who already have this vast amount of information miraculously crammed into your brains, do you have any suggestions on memorization techniques? As I look at these pages and pages of taxonomic information my head begins to spin. In hopes of keeping it attached, I thought I'd come to you all for any suggestions. Or maybe a pill that will implant it all into my brain.

*To be a little more specific, I have to know some, but not all, of the phylum for fungi and animalia. Also be able to describe the characteristics of these phylum.

Don't memorize it. What is right today in systematics and taxonomy will be wrong tomorrow !

[OhFace]

Thanks for all the help guys. I just thought I'd post an update. My test was today. I studied for five straight hours today going over everything again, finally feeling like I get it. Not just memorizing it, but actually understanding the concepts also.

I sit down to take the test, and about 20 minutes into it the fire alarm goes off. We leave the building only to find out that it was a false alarm. We all file back in and continue on with the test. Unfortunately they don't have the fire alarm completely reset yet and it still goes off every few minutes...you know, just incase this test wasn't already stressful enough.

I felt pretty confident with the first couple pages of the test, but then as I went on I began to think my teacher was crazy. These questions were so detailed, there's no way I could have memorized all this information she expected us to know. I finished the test and checked the answers when I got home (she posts them online after everyone finishes). I got a whopping 48%!

I went in feeling that I knew my stuff, and came out feeling like a complete idiot. After the test all you heard was that no one could believe the amount of detail on it. Maybe we're all just slackers and don't want to learn...maybe my teacher is just crazy. All I know is that I have to bust my ass to make sure that this test doesn't irrepairably mess up my grade for the semester.

In case you're wondering how detailed it actually was, here's a question from the test:

During metamorphosis, echinoderms undergo a transformation from motile larvae to a fairly sedentary (and sometimes sessile) existence as adults. What should be true of adults, though not of larvae? Adults should
A) lack mesodermally derived tissues.
B) appear to possess radial symmetry.
C) be diploblastic.
D) lack a body cavity.
E) two of these are true.

[Scribble]

Originally Posted by OhFace

In case you're wondering how detailed it actually was, here's a question from the test:

During metamorphosis, echinoderms undergo a transformation from motile larvae to a fairly sedentary (and sometimes sessile) existence as adults. What should be true of adults, though not of larvae? Adults should
A) lack mesodermally derived tissues.
B) appear to possess radial symmetry.
C) be diploblastic.
D) lack a body cavity.
E) two of these are true.

I hate to break it to you, but in any systematics course I can think of, a question like that would be considered pretty standard. It's a pretty well-written question, actually. The way the question's worded hints at the answer, and (I assume, anyway) that you had to know where echinoderms are in the cladistic tree that describes animal biodiversity. It's really a pretty straightforward probe to see that you understand at least some of the evolutionary patterns in the bilateria.

And echinoderms are a pretty big group. It's not like you got stuck with a question about related families within a single order, or something.

[Scribble]

My condolences on doing crappy on the exam, though. I know how lousy it feels to flunk. Or even to walk out feeling like a moron, knowing you did terribly.

Did you have specimens to look at, or anything? Actually being able to pick up--or better yet, dissect specimens--and see the body plans for yourself is incredibly helpful. If you only had text and pictures to go by...yeah, that really, really sucks.

[OhFace]

It's not a systematics course, it's just the second semester of general biology. I guess I just didn't realize that in addition to memorizing all of the phylum of fungi and animals that I would also need to memorize the differences in appearance between the larvae and adults. This test covered a vast amount of material (eight chapters) from the origin of life and the timeline of the development of life forms, to the origin of life hypothesis, to the minute details of prokaryotes and eukaryotes, all fungi taxonomy and animal taxonomy, animal structures and functions, as well as animal nutrition, etc. The list just goes on and on. I suppose I'm just used to teachers being more concerned with the students understanding the material and knowing the concepts, not memorizing every word in every chapter. Eh, that's life.

[Scribble]

Originally Posted by OhFace

It's not a systematics course, it's just the second semester of general biology.

I don't know where you're going to school, but where I am, the second course in the general bio sequence is basically a systematics/biodiversity course, with some ecology and physiology thrown in.

I guess I just didn't realize that in addition to memorizing all of the phylum of fungi and animals that I would also need to memorize the differences in appearance between the larvae and adults.

See, that's the thing. The echinoderm question you gave earlier in the thread isn't a straightforward recall question. Really, it's not. It's more like an applied logic problem, using some background knowledge. I'd make a bet that your prof didn't expect you to have memorized the larval and adult features of echinoderms. The fact that the question itself tells you that the larvae are motile and the adults are sessile says as much. What she probably expected was that you were going to use some general knowledge of animal systematics and development to figure out which of the given answers is right.

It sucks that the prof and your text aren't enough to help you get a good sense of the patterns you need to understand. That means you'll have to find them yourself, with the help of your textbook. (And if you learn how to find your own patterns now, it's a skill that'll serve you well in organic chem, if you end up taking organic chem.) But those patterns aren't that hard to understand, once you've seen them. And they're not hard to remember, either, because: 1. They're really weird and interesting, and 2. They hang together as a coherent whole.

Do you get to do dissections and such? Because, if you do, it's much easier to grasp the differences among the animal phyla than it would be if you had to rely on pictures and verbal descriptions. Not to mention that dissection lets you see lots of really fascinating stuff about the physiology of the critters you're working with!

This test covered a vast amount of material (eight chapters) from the origin of life and the timeline of the development of life forms

Yeah, the timeline is something you may have to memorize at first. Though it should be like remembering a really vivid story or movie plot. If you like weird creatures in science fiction books and movies, you should really love evolutionary biology. There are lots of cool twists and turns in the formation of real living things that no author or moviemaker could ever top! I'm sure that, unwittingly, you've memorized the plots of lots and movies--even some pretty elaborate plots, or movies with several sublots, and things like that. You don't remember those plots because you had to sit down and painstakingly memorize them, right? You remember them because you were interested in them and found the stories particularly vivid. Same deal with learning the general history of life on Earth.

I feel really bad for you that you got stuck with a course that just isn't working for you. A lame class can suck the life (no pun intended!) out of even the most incredible material. If you were in a good course, I'd bet you'd find that learning this stuff would take far less effort.

I remember the University of Arizona's Tree of Life web project being really good. I haven't checked it out for a while, though. IIRC, they have a bunch of info for students at your level. I just tried to Google it, but, for whatever reason, I couldn't get the page to come up. I'd bet the project's still there, though. I have a seriously crappy dial-up connection, which doesn't help any.

to the minute details of prokaryotes and eukaryotes

How many minute details are we talking, here? Like, what do you have to know? Gram positive v. Gram negative critters? Prokaryotic v. eukaryotic gene expression? Eubacteria v. archaea, various ways of sorting out domains/kingdoms/what-have-you?

all fungi taxonomy and animal taxonomy, animal structures and functions, as well as animal nutrition, etc.

What fungal and animal taxonomy do you need to know?

The list just goes on and on. I suppose I'm just used to teachers being more concerned with the students understanding the material and knowing the concepts, not memorizing every word in every chapter. Eh, that's life.

I totally understand your frustration, but you don't have to keep on approaching the material in the way you've been doing it. If you were in Columbus, I'd say you could drop by during my office hours or something like that. I suppose that's pretty useless to you down in Miami, though. Sorry for being kind of pointless, here, I suppose.

[OhFace]

Originally Posted by Scribble

The fact that the question itself tells you that the larvae are motile and the adults are sessile says as much. What she probably expected was that you were going to use some general knowledge of animal systematics and development to figure out which of the given answers is right.

Now that you describe it in this way I can see what you are saying. At the time I was reading the question I kept looking at the (correct) answer and thinking that starfish larvae must also be radial. If I had thouht it through more I would have saw those hints in the question.

Originally Posted by Scribble

Do you get to do dissections and such? Not to mention that dissection lets you see lots of really fascinating stuff about the physiology of the critters you're working with!

No, no dissections what so ever; it's the first time I've taken a biology course and not done dissections. I don't know why they do it that way. Actually all the class consists of is the teacher standing in front of the class and reading our already printed notes to us. I think she's new to teaching. She doesn't technically "teach" us anything, she just reads to us.

Originally Posted by Scribble

Yeah, the timeline is something you may have to memorize at first. Though it should be like remembering a really vivid story or movie plot.

That's a really good way to put it. As I studied it more and more it did come together, and become more interesting to me. I think if my teacher had more enthusiasm I would have had a lot more interest in the material.

Originally Posted by Scribble

I feel really bad for you that you got stuck with a course that just isn't working for you. A lame class can suck the life (no pun intended!) out of even the most incredible material. If you were in a good course, I'd bet you'd find that learning this stuff would take far less effort.

I'm sure this is absolutely true. Actually I am finding this out literally right now. I took statistics last semester and just couldn't keep up with the teacher spitting terminology at us from day one, without explaining it at all. I attempted to teach it to myself as much as I could by reading the book and doing the suggested problems, but was only able to pull away with a D+. I was devestated, I've never done that poorly in any of my college classes. This semester I decided to retake it with another teacher and I have a high A in the class. It's amazing how simple statistics can be when it is taught effectively!

Originally Posted by Scribble

How many minute details are we talking, here? Like, what do you have to know? Gram positive v. Gram negative critters? Prokaryotic v. eukaryotic gene expression? Eubacteria v. archaea, various ways of sorting out domains/kingdoms/what-have-you? What fungal and animal taxonomy do you need to know?

All of the above, and then some. As for fungal taxonomy, we had to know the defining characteristics of fungi and the meaning and significance of their anatomical structures, the ecological impacts of fungi, the life cycle of fungi and how each phylum follows it, the four phyla and their features. For animal taxonomy we had to know the characteristics of the invertebrate phyla and the progression of complexity in body plans. What I found to be most difficult is that she gave us over twenty pages of description for the invertebrate phyla so it was difficult to distinguish what ones were most important.

Originally Posted by Scribble

I totally understand your frustration, but you don't have to keep on approaching the material in the way you've been doing it. If you were in Columbus, I'd say you could drop by during my office hours or something like that. I suppose that's pretty useless to you down in Miami, though. Sorry for being kind of pointless, here, I suppose.

Thank you, not pointless at all. Actually I feel a little better about it all now, even though that doesn't change my grade. If Columbus were anywhere in the vicinity I'd definitely take you up on your offer. It always feels good when a concept that seems so complex finally falls into place and makes sense. Hopefully I'll now be able to study more effectively for future tests in this class.

[Scribble]

Originally Posted by OhFace

No, no dissections what so ever; it's the first time I've taken a biology course and not done dissections. I don't know why they do it that way. Actually all the class consists of is the teacher standing in front of the class and reading our already printed notes to us. I think she's new to teaching. She doesn't technically "teach" us anything, she just reads to us.

I take it you go to a large, research-oriented institution? Like, maybe a huge state university?

If so, your prof may or may not be new. But I'll bet that she's not rewarded for her teaching; she's rewarded for her research. What matters most to the department she's in is whether or not she's pulling in big grants and pumping out lots of lovely publications. So every second she spends teaching is a second that she's not spending on what may well be, to her, the really important stuff.

It sucks, but it's true.

Some profs do a really good job with their classes and feel that teaching is important, even at large research institutions. I was lucky enough to have some really good ones. But I had some really crappy profs, too.

I'm a lowly TA. I'm at a big research institution. My advisor has come right out and told me that I'm spending too much time and effort on my teaching, and that my research is my first priority. Always. Unfortunately for me, I've sort of come to see my teaching as being ultimately the more worthwhile of the major things I do here. Only a small handful of people--maybe no more than two or three people--has any real interest at all in my research. And if I don't do my research, no-one really feels like anything much is lacking. On the other hand, my teaching actually has a postive effect (at least some of the time, I hope) on at least some non-negligible proportion of the 50 students I get every 3 months.

TA positions, where I am, are made based on which students the dept. wants to support. And, of course, the people a dept. wants to support are the ones whose research projects are deemed worthy of support--not the ones who are necessarily the best teachers. There's a guy in my lab who lost his TA support because--get this--[i]he spent too much time doing a good job teaching.[i] He wasn't making progress quickly enough on his research for either his advisor, or the dept. chair, or whoever, and so he lost his job. This guy actually lost a job by being dedicated to doing that job well. Strange how that works.

That's a really good way to put it.

Thanks.

This semester I decided to retake it with another teacher and I have a high A in the class. It's amazing how simple statistics can be when it is taught effectively!

I'm glad to hear you're doing well in stats. Stats is, IMHO, a pretty interesting subject.

What I found to be most difficult is that she gave us over twenty pages of description for the invertebrate phyla so it was difficult to distinguish what ones were most important.

Yeah, that's not easy. Which textbook do you use? We've got the Campbell and Reece (actually, I think it's down to just Reece for the most recent edition) Biology text. (Published by Benjamin Cummings.) I think it does a pretty good job. If that's not the one you're using, I don't suggest you go out and buy the hundred and forty dollar behemoth. But there may be one in the library or available through interlibrary loan.

Thank you, not pointless at all. Actually I feel a little better about it all now, even though that doesn't change my grade.

You're welcome. Glad I could help.

Actually, this thread's been kind of nice for me, too. Teaching this quarter has been pretty rough. We've had some problems with the course, including a horrible screw-up with the most recent exam. The students are all really unhappy, and I'm not sure they're really learning all that much--not because I, myself, am necessarily doing a lousy job, but because the course set-up leaves much to be desired. It's nice to know I can still actually help somebody learn something.

[Flander]

I take it you go to a large, research-oriented institution? Like, maybe a huge state university?

If so, your prof may or may not be new. But I'll bet that she's not rewarded for her teaching; she's rewarded for her research. What matters most to the department she's in is whether or not she's pulling in big grants and pumping out lots of lovely publications. So every second she spends teaching is a second that she's not spending on what may well be, to her, the really important stuff.

Yes, I go to the University of Miami, a big research school. Everything makes much more sense now after reading your explaination. Our school is known for not having the greatest science teachers. Especially Physics, most students take it somewhere else and transfer the credits over, that's how bad it is. It's really unfortunate that the schools put those kind of stresses on teachers, it really is a disservice to both them and the students.

Which textbook do you use? We've got the Campbell and Reece.

That is actually the exact book we use. I read all of the chapters for the first exam, but found it didn't help me much, so I didn't read it at all for this one. I honestly don't think it would have made much of a difference. I think I'd benefit most though by using the book as a guide with my notes. There's just not enough time in the day to actually read it all.

Actually, this thread's been kind of nice for me, too. Teaching this quarter has been pretty rough. We've had some problems with the course, including a horrible screw-up with the most recent exam. The students are all really unhappy, and I'm not sure they're really learning all that much--not because I, myself, am necessarily doing a lousy job, but because the course set-up leaves much to be desired. It's nice to know I can still actually help somebody learn something.

Yeah, I can understand how situations like that can end up happening. It actually sound a lot like my bio class too. Over half of the class doesn't even show up for lecture anymore, they just show up for the test. The school system sounds like it's got it's priorities way unbalanced.

Again, thanks for everything. If only all teachers cared so much!

[OhFace]

Sorry, that above post was me, I forgot to log out of my boyfriend's account.

[Scribble]

Originally Posted by OhFace

Everything makes much more sense now after reading your explaination.

Cool. I wish more people understood how the universities they go to work.

Our school is known for not having the greatest science teachers. Especially Physics, most students take it somewhere else and transfer the credits over, that's how bad it is.

My school has some good ones and some bad ones. But lots of students opt to take their intro-level science credits--and sometimes some of their other freshman-level courses--at a local community college and then transfer the credit. The credits cost less and the instructor's attention is, at least in theory, on teaching.

Again, thanks for everything. If only all teachers cared so much!

You're welcome! And I feel flattered now.

[OhFace]

I just got the best news today! Apparently a lot of people cheated on the test by discussing answers when we evacuated during the fire alarm. I obviously didn't, but my teacher just sent out an email saying we have to retake the exam after spring break. I have a week and a half to study my butt off and hopefully redeem myself.

[CrazyCatLady]

Originally Posted by OhFace

No, no dissections what so ever; it's the first time I've taken a biology course and not done dissections. I don't know why they do it that way.

In the universities I'm familiar with, the lecture and the lab are seperate courses. So you have one course where you do nothing but lecture (what you're taking), then another course where you do nothing but experiments and dissections. It's an organizational thing as much as anything else. This way everyone in the same lecture session is in the same section of the course, which simplifies seperating out tests for grading. Both the bio and chem departments did it that way at my school, though the physics department did their labs and lectures as part of the same course so there were several sections in the same lecture.

[OhFace]

Originally Posted by CrazyCatLady

In the universities I'm familiar with, the lecture and the lab are seperate courses.

My class is also set up the same way. I was referring to my lab, in which we don't do dissections. The only specimin we've even had in class so far is an anemone.