[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: birds and/or/with dino's
David Marjanovic <email@example.com> wrote:
> Sure, the latest morphological analysis (in the *Indohyus*
> paper) found whales + raoellids and artiodactyls as
> sister-groups, but that analysis was rather lacking in
> "anthracotheres", and I think all characters were unordered
> or something... have to check...
Yes, it would certainly be useful to include both anthracotheres and raoelliids
in future phylogenetic analyses. The morphological analysis of Boisserie et
al. (2005) found strong support for hippopotamids nested inside the
"anthracothere" plexus. But this same analysis found only weak support for an
"anthracothere"-Archaeoceti clade (with archaeocetes used here to test cetacean
relationships). It would be very interesting to see what effects raoelliids
such as _Indohyus_ have on this clade.
> Pegasoferae almost parodizes this approach. I like it. :-)
The name Pegasoferae is cute, but even most molecular phylogenies fail to find
support for the clade itself (e.g., Springer et al., 2007; Syst. Biol. 56:
> For Euarchontoglires, there's an alternative: Supraprimates
> Waddell et al. 1999 (supra = beyond). I've also seen
> "Glimates" ( = "Glires + Primates") a few times on the
> Internet, but that's not published.
Oh yeah. Glimates is SO much better! :d