[Taxacom] Primates (was: burn out)

John Grehan jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
Thu Apr 23 10:18:47 CDT 2009


If 'stability' is your justification then perhaps you should group tarsiers with other prosimians because that was the 'stable' classification until it became 'unstabilized' by the haplorrhine argument.

John Grehan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Kenneth Kinman
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:40 AM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: [Taxacom] Primates (was: burn out)
> Hi Michael,
>         I agree that Strepsirhini and Haplorhini are
> best regarded as sister clades (making up the larger clade Euprimates),
> and I coded them as such. It's within Suborder Proprimates that the main
> controversies arise.
>           Since my 2004 classification, I see that
> Bloch and Silcox (2006) published a detailed paper on Carpolestidae.
> This study seems to indicate that the sister group of Euprimates is
> probably a Carpolestidae-Plesiadapidae clade (not Carpolestidae alone).
> Therefore, I would change the coding from:
>       8  Plesiadapidae
>       9  Carpolestidae
>      10  {{Euprimates}}
> to:
>      8  Plesiadapidae
>      B  Carpolestidae
>      9  {{Euprimates}}
>         The Picrodontidae might be involved as well, so
> I will probably put it just after Microsyopidae (instead of just before
> it). In such a controversial phylogeny, such changes are to be expected.
> However, the family list is still the same, and I just have to change
> the coding a bit. Suborder Proprimates is clearly paraphyletic, but
> exactly where the Euprimates split off will remain controversial.
>                     -------Ken
> Kinman
> P.S. Yes, John, I know you don't like a paraphyletic Pongidae (as do
> strict cladists in general). However, at least it contains the same
> living taxa that it has for many, many decades. All you have to do to
> make it cladistically useful as well is to add in that {{Hominidae}}
> exgroup marker (plus the sister group coding). That makes it both useful
> AND stable. You can change the coding to show {{Hominidae}} as sister
> group to the orangutan clade is you want. Happily my classification
> allows you to do that without destabilizing it.  Family Pongidae% is
> clearly paraphyletic in both morphology and molecules, but it is simply
> all great apes that lack the synapomorphies of Hominidae.  Having strict
> cladists overlumping and/or splitting it up in "umpteen" different ways
> demonstrates just how destabilizing paraphylophobia can be.  I still
> suspect that gorillas and chimps might end up clading together, but we
> will just have to wait and see (for now I am still showing gorillas in a
> clade splitting off just before chimps, which is still the most widely
> held view).
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

More information about the Taxacom mailing list