[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


In his post about the validity of phylogenetic hypotheses
based on adaptive scenarios, Tom Holtz wrote..

> Ring-tailed lemurs, however, are not so nested within known fliers, 
> and its flightlessness is best regarded as primary.

Oops, bad choice of taxon: there is a minority opinion that all 
primates *are* secondarily flightless! 

(Sorry, couldn't resist. For those of you who don't know, the
mammalogist K.C. Beard believes that paromomyoids [basal 
archontans.. though some workers regard them as dermopterans] were 
volant, and are the sister-group to dermopterans, megachiropterans 
and primates. In this scenario, it is most parsimonious to accept 
flightlessness as a reversal for basal primates (i.e. the most 
RCA of primates and their sister-group was volant]. However, 
reconstruction of _Paromomys_ and related taxa as volant is 
controversial and quite probably not accurate.. plus whether or not 
dermopterans, megachiropterans and primates form a monophyletic 
trichotomy is hotly contested. In other words, most workers would 
_not_ agree that primates are flightless.. I just thought I would 
point it out that it has been advocated. Sorry.]

Good to have you back Tom. Tell us about Portugal goddam it!

"No new roads.. stop nuclear testing"