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

Re: Reduced Consensus (Was: Afrotheria revisited)



So really it's not too unlikely.  Especially since tons of relevent taxa
weren't included.  How about > some lipotyphlans, bats, carnivorimorphs,
afrosoricans, meridungulates, etc.?

You're asking for a whole phylogeny of placentals in that case. For example, if you include carnivoramorphs, then you have to include 'creodonts'... and so on.

Of course. There is no other way to test the composition and position of Afrotheria. That's why nobody has done it so far; we'll have to wait for an opus magnum like Livezey & Zusi's on Neornithes, except with many more fossils.


Really, the entire tree's poorly supported.  Bootstrapping results in 95%
support for Rhynchocyon+Myohyrax, and 68% for Macroscelidea.  71% for
Haplomylus+Macroscelidea and 66% for the clade of everything except
Protungulatum and Mithrandir.  Every other node is
supported by <50%.

Is this partly the consequence of low taxon sampling?

This needs to be found out by trial & error.