[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: New Papers of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood
There are NO primate species (or genera for that matter) that occur
in both Africa and Madagascar. As a matter of fact I don't think
Africa and Madagascar have *any* mammal species in common (except
the probably introduced bush-pig). It is true that the Madagascar
mammals are most closely related to african ones, since they are the
result of a very few (about 6 or 7) sweepstake dispersals from
Africa to Madagascar.
There is definitely a West Gondwanan element in the Madagascar fauna
(e g iguanas and boine snakes) but admittedly it is not very large.
However it would make much more sense to lump the Indomalayan and
Afrotropic biogeographic regions than Madagascar and the Afrotropic,
both on the grounds of general similarity and the proportion of
shared taxa. Having visited all major biogeographic regions on Earth
my personal opinion is that Madagascar is the one that is most distinct.
At 21:54 2007-10-11, Jaime A. Headden wrote:
David Marjanovic (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
<Biogeographically it does not make sense to lump Madagascar into Africa.>
Current biological endemism is also linked to Africa, including many of the
primate species that exist there and on Africa, and no where else. It is (at
least currently) part of the African entourage, rather than historically part
of a series of smaller landmasses that connected with other, disparate larger
landmasses. This is also why currently India is linked to mainland Asian
faunas, rather than some continuing subcontinental endemism that persists only
there. Collecting from India's Cretaceous formations has yet to yield such
fossils, however, as small deinonychosaurs.
Jaime A. Headden
"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)
Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives
you all the tools to get online.