[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: A new twist on Cope's law
On 1/18/06, David Marjanovic <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Which is... in fact... _just_ Bergmann's Rule. The study demonstrated
> Bergmann's but not Cope's (which is perhaps better attributed to Depéret).
In the case of this study, yes, I agree. Is the occurrence of Cope's
Rule always reflective of Bergmann's Rule, though? My feeling is that
it isn't. I'd be curious to read more on this.
> Don't be so sure about that. Sauropodomorphs don't seem to (W4tP -- in
I'm sure there several deviations from the norm, which isn't at all
surprising. I'm just going by the general trend explained in:
Hone, D. W. E., T. M. Keesey, D. Pisani, and A. Purvis. 2005.
Macroevolutionary trends in the Dinosauria: Cope's rule. Journal of
Evolutionary Biology 18: 587-whateverthelastpagenumberwas.
BScH, Carleton University
Vertebrate Palaeontology & Palaeoecology
Paleoart website: http://www.geocities.com/paleoportfolio/
MSN Messenger: email@example.com