[Taxacom] Morphological molecular reconciliation again (was erecting or sinking higher taxa

John Grehan calabar.john at gmail.com
Sun Oct 14 19:13:08 CDT 2012


But one could equally well 'explain', as total evidence, that it is the
molecular similarities that represent the symplesiomorphies and the
morphogenetics that provides the synaporphies. One is the converse of the
other and nothing is advanced beyond the incongruence.

BUT (and its a big 'but') only the morphogenetic evidence can integrate the
fossil record directly into the picture.

John Grehan

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org>wrote:

> Curtis has it right. That is my explanation that included, as total
> evidence, both apparently conflicting morphological and molecular patterns.
>
> The point is to provide a process-based (macroevolution) scientific
> explanation, which may be refuted, applicable to both molecular and
> morphological cladograms. It may be wrong, but does explain the patterns.
>
> _______________________
> Richard H. Zander
> Missouri Botanical Garden
> PO Box 299
> St. Louis, MO 63166 U.S.A.
> richard.zander at mobot.org
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Curtis Clark
> Sent: Sun 10/14/2012 1:45 PM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Morphological molecular reconciliation again (was
> erecting or sinking higher taxa
>
>
>
> On 2012-10-14 9:25 AM, John Grehan wrote:
> > Richard's conclusion is only possible by saying that the morpogenetic
> > evidence is wrong (i.e. throwing it out). And I did mention in my
> response
> > an explanation for the molecular evidence being wrong in this case - that
> > the molecular evidence result has been negatively affected by the
> presence
> > of unrecognized plesiomorphies (due to the phenetic nature of character
> > state determination and analysis).
>
> If I'm understanding Richard, he's hypothesizing that orangutans are a
> grade, that was at one time widespread, and that gave rise to chimps,
> bonobos, mountain and lowland gorillas, and humans, without itself being
> transformed by anagenesis. Those orangs that gave rise to humans had
> previously given rise to chimps, and so there would be expected to be
> strong molecular similarities between humans, chimps, and the extinct
> orang subgroup that gave rsie to them. But those orangs still share
> morphological features with the SE Asian orangs, and those features were
> less changed when humans speciated than when chimps, bonobos, or
> gorillas speciated. So the orang-human morphological similarities can
> appear to be symplesiomorphies relative to chimps, bonobos, and
> gorillas, while at the same time being evidence of close relationship.
>
> Richard, am I on the right track?
>
> --
> Curtis Clark        http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark
> Biological Sciences                   +1 909 869 4140
> Cal Poly Pomona, Pomona CA 91768
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org <http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>



More information about the Taxacom mailing list