No subject

John Grehan jrg13 at PSU.EDU
Tue Jan 12 16:35:03 CST 1999

To those who have expressed interest in current literature relating
to panbiogeography:

Cox, C. B. (1998). From generalized tracks to ocean basins-how useful is
panbiogeography. Journal of biogeography 25, 813-828.

This paper is an interesting attempt to trash (but in a civil and
intellectual manner)
panbiogeography and complements the rhetorical critiques of vicariance
cladists. A response is in the works.

Weston, P. H. and M. D. Crisp (1996). Trans-Pacific biogeographic patterns. In
The Origin and evolution of Pacific island biotas, New Guinea to Eastern
patterns and processes, pp. 215-232. Edited by A. Keast and S. E. Miller.
Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

This is also an interesting paper in that it is the only paper in the
volume that
recongizes anything of Croizat's vast contributions to Pacific island
and the only paper to recognize empirical content for  distribution
geometry (i.e.
the spatial structure). The authors use tracks, but analyse the patterns in
the traditional
mode of looking for congruence between a biological relatioship and a
historical narrative (drawn in the form of a cladogram).

There was one paper by Sherwin Carlquist that denied any real "generalized
in the Pacific, but only in reference to vicariance biogeographic methods
which have
not been instrumental in establishing generalized track patterns for the
Pacific (although
some vicariance cladistic authors have recognized them). Carlquists manner
here is
intriguing in that it parallel's Mayr who has also pretended no knowledge of
Croizat, but mentions terminology that can only suggtest otherwise. Something
for the historians to mull over.

Sincerely, John Grehan

More information about the Taxacom mailing list