[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: ptero and bat origins
Quoting Tim Williams <email@example.com>:
> >Cetartiodactyla? Totally unnecessary. Cetacea is a subclade of
> >Artiodactyla (or Paraxonia)--it's not even clear that artiodactyls as
> >traditionally conceived share a special relationship exclusive of whales.
> Recent discoveries (esp. from southern Asia) have reinforced the
> Cetacea-Artiodactyla link.
I'm not arguing that whales are not related to those species traditionally
included in Artiodactyla (see above: "Cetacea is a subclade of
Artiodactyla"). What I meant in the second sentence was: if Artiodactyla is
actually *paraphyletic* with respect to Cetacea, as seems possible,
then "Cetartiodactyla" as a name is unnecessary: Cetacea would merely be
subsumed under Artiodactyla.
Even if traditional Artiodactyla and Cetacea are sister-groups, I think
Paraxonia sounds better than Cetartiodactyla :-)
Department of Linguistics
University of Michigan