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

Re: Tree of Life webpage

> The TOL presents Temnospondyls as diverging before the
> Amniote-Amphibian split, which would seem to suggest they
> weren't amphibians at all, but rather some sister taxa to
> Amphibians&Reptiles
> Whereas wikipedia's Temnospondyl page seems to firmly place
> them within Amphibia (ie after the amniotes split from the
> linage that gave rise to modern amphibians), and suggests
> lissamphibians may even be a branch of the temnospondyl tree
> (rather than a side-branch like the lepospondyls).

The ground rule for Wikipedia and ToLweb is always:

"Which has got the better and newer sources?"

In the present case, it is mainly Sidor (2005) on WP vs Laurin & Soler-Gijón 
(2006) on ToL. Can't decide, am not a temnospondologist and have not read 
either. But ultimately it might be we can't tell yet. Two years ago, I'd have 
favored charadriiforms outside "higher waterbirds". These days, I am more 
reserved; Estelle Bourdon's prophaetornithid studies look as if the tropicbirds 
could make a good missing link - very autapomorphic, but apart from that they 
look as if they'd link waders to the stork-albatross-and-whatnot group.

(David: I noted that Estelle's thesis has some nomina nuda. A few of them have 
since been resolved. Is she planning to describe the others anytime soon? At 
that occasion, all the best for her work... I find it highly interesting and 
hope to see more of it in the future!)