From: "Jaime A. Headden" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: New mammalian clade names
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 15:40:54 -0700 (PDT)
Eric Lurio wrote:
<Why not just "insectivora?" If it contains MOST of
most of the traditional "Insectivora" then why not jut
let it keep the tradtional name?>
Because Insectivora includes tenrecs, which are
being excluded, as well as a group of other forms, and
presently may be considered polyphyletic in consisting
of a series of forms, some of which (eg.,
macroscelids) are considered closer to archontans
(including bats and primates), or afrotheres (this
would be called Uranotheria). I also am not aware of a
phylogenetic definition for Insectivora, but the group
my be historically a polyphyletic assemblage. The only
apparent insectivores still considered in that same
"region" of the phylogeny would be talpids (moles) and
the like, as well as shrews.
Insectivora could be considered a polyphyletic taxon
that represents a grade, not a natural unity
Jaime "James" A. Headden
Dinosaurs are horrible, terrible creatures! Even the
fluffy ones, the snuggle-up-at-night-with ones. You think
they're fun and sweet, but watch out for that stray tail
spike! Down, gaston, down, boy! No, not on top of Momma!
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!