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

RE: origin of bats




Mike Keesey wrote:


> I think he meant to put a comma between "civets" and the rest, since
> *none* of those genera are viverrid. _Protictis_ is a stem-carnivoran


Yep, _Protictis_ is a viverravid, so I guess it's close to viverrids in one 
respect (the name).  :-)  A nice reference on the subject of basal 
carnivorosauromorphs is:


Flynn, J.J. and Wesley-Hunt, G.D. (2005).  Phylogeny of the Carnivora: Basal 
relationships among the carnivoramorphans, and assessment of the position of 
'Miacoidea' relative to Carnivora."  J. Syst. Palaeontol. 3: 1-28. 


> If you include only those taxa and bats, the topology should be:
> (_Ptilocercus_, (_Chiroptera_, (_Protictis_, (_Nandinia_,
> _Viverridae_)))). Odd choice of taxa....


Indeed.  Viverravidae was recovered by Flynn and Wesley-Hunt as the most basal 
carnivoromorph clade, one node up from Creodonta (sister taxon of 
Carnivoromorpha within Ferae).  Hard to see how bats (Chiroptera) could be 
nested inside this bunch.


Cheers

Tim
_________________________________________________________________
Earn cashback on your purchases with Live Search - the search that pays you 
back!
http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=earncashback