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


At 06:20 PM 5/19/98 +0100, Tony Canning wrote:

>> Note that "Amniota" and "Tetrapoda" and "Lissamphibia" are all words that
>> LONG predate cladistics, and were used by many of the late, great
>> paleontologists and neontologists of the 20th Century.
>Can anyone clarify, IS there a monophyletic label that describes early
>"amphibians" + lissamphibia (e.g. anamniota?), excluding amniota, and if
>so, what is the definition and what groups are included?

If what you mean is: is there a monophyletic group containing lissamphibians
and all taxa more closely related to them than to amniotes, then yes, there
is.  What it should be called and what taxa are included in it is a matter
of debate.  See M. Laurin's website on the Tree of Life pages for more details.

If what you mean is: is there a monophyletic group including all
non-amniotic tetrapods, then no, there isn't.  Frogs & salamanders are more
closely related to us then to Ichthyostega, for example.

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist     Webpage: http://www.geol.umd.edu
Dept. of Geology              Email:th81@umail.umd.edu
University of Maryland        Phone:301-405-4084
College Park, MD  20742       Fax:  301-314-9661