Cladistics and insular evolution, an unfortunate marriage? Another tangle in the Deinogalerix analysis of Borrani et al. (2017)
Insular taxa, such as the late Miocene giant erinaceid Deinogalerix and the insular hominin Homo floresiensis, display a surprisingly primitive placement in cladistic analyses of their respective groups. This has led to speculations of early dispersal onto islands, not corroborated by biogeographica...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cladistics 2018-12, Vol.34 (6), p.708-713 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 713 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 708 |
container_title | Cladistics |
container_volume | 34 |
creator | Hoek Ostende, Lars W. |
description | Insular taxa, such as the late Miocene giant erinaceid Deinogalerix and the insular hominin Homo floresiensis, display a surprisingly primitive placement in cladistic analyses of their respective groups. This has led to speculations of early dispersal onto islands, not corroborated by biogeographical evidence. Insular evolution is notorious for vast phenotypic changes in at least part of the island fauna. These changes encompass typical apomorphies, but, as they may also include evolutionary reversals, a parsimony‐based tree will inevitably yield a more basic position in cladograms. Therefore, we need to be cautious in drawing hasty conclusions from phylogenetic trees including insular taxa. Scrutiny is required to monitor possible evolutionary reversals and scenarios should be tested against biogeography to test their viability. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/cla.12238 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2581821173</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2581821173</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3658-1a17465204578318027b8308e16e587e0750c46660f3bf9e50d6f2fc0613ae613</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1qGzEQx0VIII7TQ95AkIsNXWckWR8-FcfpR8CQS3pe5PWsIyNLrrTb1rc8Sp6lTxal7qmQOcwww-8_MPMn5IrBhJW4abydMM6FOSEDBjNVAQh2Sgagp6YSAPqcXOS8BQCu-GxAnhferl3uXJOpDWvqQu69TRR_Rt93LoaPZUz70MbU9cF2SHc2JWc3-InOQ-yeMNHOho3HIqWlpXfoQtxYj8n9LlrrD9llGlt6G1OywVHs_rxYP6EjDkyPL8lZa33GD__qkHz_8vlx8a1aPny9X8yXVSOUNBWzTE-V5DCV2ghmgOuVEWCQKZRGI2gJzVQpBa1YtTOUsFYtbxtQTFgsaUhGx737FH_0mLt653KD3tuAsc81l4YZzpgWBb3-D93GPpVLCsXErLxXGlmo8ZFqUsw5YVvvkyvPOdQM6jcv6uJF_deLwt4c2V_O4-F9sF4s50fFK5mViVE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2139122585</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cladistics and insular evolution, an unfortunate marriage? Another tangle in the Deinogalerix analysis of Borrani et al. (2017)</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</creatorcontrib><description>Insular taxa, such as the late Miocene giant erinaceid Deinogalerix and the insular hominin Homo floresiensis, display a surprisingly primitive placement in cladistic analyses of their respective groups. This has led to speculations of early dispersal onto islands, not corroborated by biogeographical evidence. Insular evolution is notorious for vast phenotypic changes in at least part of the island fauna. These changes encompass typical apomorphies, but, as they may also include evolutionary reversals, a parsimony‐based tree will inevitably yield a more basic position in cladograms. Therefore, we need to be cautious in drawing hasty conclusions from phylogenetic trees including insular taxa. Scrutiny is required to monitor possible evolutionary reversals and scenarios should be tested against biogeography to test their viability.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0748-3007</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-0031</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/cla.12238</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Biogeography ; Cladistics ; Dispersal ; Evolution ; Hominids ; Phylogeny</subject><ispartof>Cladistics, 2018-12, Vol.34 (6), p.708-713</ispartof><rights>The Willi Hennig Society 2018</rights><rights>2018 The Willi Hennig Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3658-1a17465204578318027b8308e16e587e0750c46660f3bf9e50d6f2fc0613ae613</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3658-1a17465204578318027b8308e16e587e0750c46660f3bf9e50d6f2fc0613ae613</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3114-0121</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcla.12238$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcla.12238$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,1414,27907,27908,45557,45558</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</creatorcontrib><title>Cladistics and insular evolution, an unfortunate marriage? Another tangle in the Deinogalerix analysis of Borrani et al. (2017)</title><title>Cladistics</title><description>Insular taxa, such as the late Miocene giant erinaceid Deinogalerix and the insular hominin Homo floresiensis, display a surprisingly primitive placement in cladistic analyses of their respective groups. This has led to speculations of early dispersal onto islands, not corroborated by biogeographical evidence. Insular evolution is notorious for vast phenotypic changes in at least part of the island fauna. These changes encompass typical apomorphies, but, as they may also include evolutionary reversals, a parsimony‐based tree will inevitably yield a more basic position in cladograms. Therefore, we need to be cautious in drawing hasty conclusions from phylogenetic trees including insular taxa. Scrutiny is required to monitor possible evolutionary reversals and scenarios should be tested against biogeography to test their viability.</description><subject>Biogeography</subject><subject>Cladistics</subject><subject>Dispersal</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Hominids</subject><subject>Phylogeny</subject><issn>0748-3007</issn><issn>1096-0031</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc1qGzEQx0VIII7TQ95AkIsNXWckWR8-FcfpR8CQS3pe5PWsIyNLrrTb1rc8Sp6lTxal7qmQOcwww-8_MPMn5IrBhJW4abydMM6FOSEDBjNVAQh2Sgagp6YSAPqcXOS8BQCu-GxAnhferl3uXJOpDWvqQu69TRR_Rt93LoaPZUz70MbU9cF2SHc2JWc3-InOQ-yeMNHOho3HIqWlpXfoQtxYj8n9LlrrD9llGlt6G1OywVHs_rxYP6EjDkyPL8lZa33GD__qkHz_8vlx8a1aPny9X8yXVSOUNBWzTE-V5DCV2ghmgOuVEWCQKZRGI2gJzVQpBa1YtTOUsFYtbxtQTFgsaUhGx737FH_0mLt653KD3tuAsc81l4YZzpgWBb3-D93GPpVLCsXErLxXGlmo8ZFqUsw5YVvvkyvPOdQM6jcv6uJF_deLwt4c2V_O4-F9sF4s50fFK5mViVE</recordid><startdate>201812</startdate><enddate>201812</enddate><creator>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3114-0121</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201812</creationdate><title>Cladistics and insular evolution, an unfortunate marriage? Another tangle in the Deinogalerix analysis of Borrani et al. (2017)</title><author>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3658-1a17465204578318027b8308e16e587e0750c46660f3bf9e50d6f2fc0613ae613</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Biogeography</topic><topic>Cladistics</topic><topic>Dispersal</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Hominids</topic><topic>Phylogeny</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cladistics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hoek Ostende, Lars W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cladistics and insular evolution, an unfortunate marriage? Another tangle in the Deinogalerix analysis of Borrani et al. (2017)</atitle><jtitle>Cladistics</jtitle><date>2018-12</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>708</spage><epage>713</epage><pages>708-713</pages><issn>0748-3007</issn><eissn>1096-0031</eissn><abstract>Insular taxa, such as the late Miocene giant erinaceid Deinogalerix and the insular hominin Homo floresiensis, display a surprisingly primitive placement in cladistic analyses of their respective groups. This has led to speculations of early dispersal onto islands, not corroborated by biogeographical evidence. Insular evolution is notorious for vast phenotypic changes in at least part of the island fauna. These changes encompass typical apomorphies, but, as they may also include evolutionary reversals, a parsimony‐based tree will inevitably yield a more basic position in cladograms. Therefore, we need to be cautious in drawing hasty conclusions from phylogenetic trees including insular taxa. Scrutiny is required to monitor possible evolutionary reversals and scenarios should be tested against biogeography to test their viability.</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/cla.12238</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3114-0121</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0748-3007 |
ispartof | Cladistics, 2018-12, Vol.34 (6), p.708-713 |
issn | 0748-3007 1096-0031 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2581821173 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Biogeography Cladistics Dispersal Evolution Hominids Phylogeny |
title | Cladistics and insular evolution, an unfortunate marriage? Another tangle in the Deinogalerix analysis of Borrani et al. (2017) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T01%3A35%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cladistics%20and%20insular%20evolution,%20an%20unfortunate%20marriage?%20Another%20tangle%20in%20the%20Deinogalerix%20analysis%20of%20Borrani%20et%C2%A0al.%20(2017)&rft.jtitle=Cladistics&rft.au=Hoek%20Ostende,%20Lars%20W.&rft.date=2018-12&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=708&rft.epage=713&rft.pages=708-713&rft.issn=0748-3007&rft.eissn=1096-0031&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/cla.12238&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2581821173%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2139122585&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |