[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
>On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, th81 wrote:
>> Such as Hyracotherium and Equus?
>*Are* _Hyracotherium_ and _Equus_ confamilial? Should they be?
Basal four toed equids, which used to be included under the name
'Hyracotherium' (which properly belongs to the paleothere lineage) ARE
included in Equidae in most classifications. Furthermore, three-toed equids
are, to my knowledge, *universally* included in Equidae (the one-toed
condition being evolved more than once).
So, differences in the feet as great as the number of toes are not regarded
as sufficient to separate genera out of a single family in well-studied
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Dept. of Geology
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742