Phylogeny and Paleontology

Schaeffer, Bobb; Hecht, Max K.; Eldredge, Niles

doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-9063-3_2

Cited by 122 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, even if paleontologists have used debatable concepts, this says nothing about the potential of fossils themselves if analyzed properly. In a discussion covering several of these points, Schaeffer et al (1972) claim that horse phylogeny could be reconstructed by treating all known living and fossil taxa as if they came from one time plane, so that the information that Hyracotherium is Eocene and Equus is extant is therefore superfluous. However, since all horses except Equus are extinct, this is quite different from saying that fossils are of no value in reconstructing phylogeny.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of fossils in elucidating seed plant phylogeny and macroevolution

Doyle

Donoghue

1987

Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to gain insights on the controversial question of the value of fossils in understanding phylogeny and macroevolution, we used numerical parsimony methods to analyze a data set amassed for a cladistic study of living and fossil seed plants, variously modified by subtraction and re-addition of fossil groups. Some cladograms based on extant groups alone are consistent with relationships derived from the whole data set, but the direction of leaf and sporophyll evolution in seed plants and floral evolution in angiosperms and Gnetales is equivocal. However, use of Carboniferous seed ferns as outgroups favors the concept that all seed plants were derived from ancestors with fernlike leaves, that there was a double trend to linear-dichotomous leaves in coniferopsids and Gnetales, and that gnetalian flowers are reduced relative to those of angiosperms and Bennettitales, as inferred from the whole data set. With the whole data set, it is slightly more parsimonious to assume that coniferopsids were derived from Callistophyton-like platyspermic seed ferns than from Archaeopteris-like progymnosperms, but if Archaeopteris were unknown the seed fern hypothesis would be strongly favored, while if Callistophyton were unknown both hypotheses would be equally parsimonious. Bennettitales strengthen relationships between Gnetales and angiosperms, which are only slightly stronger than links between Gnetales and coniferopsids when extant data alone are considered, while Caytonia clarifies reproductive homologies of angiosperms, Bennettitales, and Gnetales and their origin from platyspermic ancestors. Although fossil information does not radically alter inferred relationships among extant taxa in seed plants, it may in other groups, and it provides unique evidence on the sequence of events and possible adaptive factors involved in the origin of groups. Both contributions are especially important when there has been extensive homoptasy and/or when living groups are isolated from each other by large gaps, as is often true of higher taxa.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of fossils in elucidating seed plant phylogeny and macroevolution

Doyle

Donoghue

1987

Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considerable discussion, especially by those interested in developing defensible general methods, has been in reaction to the widespread idea that evolutionary patterns and processes manifest themselves directly, principally through the discovery of fossils, with little or no theoretical input. It is legitimate to criticize this approach to evolutionary studies as being too narrow (e.g., Schaeffer et al, 1972 ;Nelson, 1978 ;Eldredge and Cracraft, 1980). However, it would certainly be an error to equate this idea with a general «paleon-tological method» (Henning, 1966, p. 140), which assumes, falsely, that a single methodological program exists.…”

Section: * * *mentioning

confidence: 99%

Paraphyletic groups in phylogenetic analysis: Progymnospermopsida and Préphanérogames in alternative views of seed plant relationships

Stein

Beck

1987

Bulletin de la Société Botanique de France. Actualités Botaniqu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary.-Prompted by Patterson's (1981) criticism of fossils, the notion of «paraphyletic group», often used by paleontologists in phylogenetic studies, is investigated here in a cladistic con· text. Two groups are treated in detail as explicit historical hypotheses : fossil Progymnospermopsida and living and fossil Préphanérogames. Farris's formai definition of paraphyly is adopted but irnplemented using named transitions in cladistic characters as delirniters of each group. In addition, it is suggested that a «candidate for ancestor» of each derived «outside» taxon be recognized within each hypothesis of paraphyly. Using this approach, the paraphyletic status of both Progymnospermopsida and Phréphanérogames is assessed under the phylogenetic views of Beek, Rothwell, Meyen, and Doyle and Donoghue. Although there are major differences in the «candidates for anceston, paraphyly is supported for the Progymnospermopsida in each case. Paraphyletic status for Préphanéro-games, however, is only possible under the Rothwell and Doyle and Donoghue phylogenetic view· points, and seems vulnerable to likely changes in the interpretation of certain Mesozoic «pterido-sperm» taxa as they become better known. Beyond simple cladistic description, however, there remains the question whether the Progymnospermopsida is an «objectively real» or «biologically meaningfub group. We suggest that the combination of features «typically gymnospermous secondary growth» and «pteridophytic reproduction» indicates an evolutionary significance for the group.

show abstract

“…As Schaeffer et al (1972) rightly insist, there are logical and practical pitfalls besetting those who infer ancestry from stratigraphy. But are not they and like-minded systematists similarly afflicted?…”

Section: Phylogeny-inferred or Observed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The importance attached by some theorists (Cracraft 1974;Schaeffer et al 1972) to comparative morphological data in phylogenetic reconstruction is of particular methodological interest to systematists studying fossil planktonic foraminifera. This group is preserved abundantly in Cenozoic strata.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of ancestry in planktonic foraminifera:Globoquadrina Dehiscens

Scott

1976

New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The utility of comparative morphology in estimating ancestry in a group that evolved iteratively is examined in a study of Globoquadrina dehiscens (upper OligoceneMiocene) and Truncorotaloides primitiva (Paleocene-middle Eocene). Gross shape of shells in axial and spiral orientations is closely comparable as is the globorotalid-like surface topography of chambers. Similar ontogenetic changes in aperture shape occur although the flap-like extension characteristic of apertures formed late in the ontogeny of G. dehiscens is absent in T. primitiva. Globoquadrina debiscens might be interpreted as the more advanced shell because of somewhat greater compression of lateformed chambers (possibly signifying improved form resistance late in ontogeny), but to infer that it descended from T. primitiva is at variance with the stratigraphic data. These show that the taxa are in separate lineages that may have differentiated in the Paleocene. Although some systematists urge the use of comparative morphology in estimating ancestry, stratigraphic data are especially valuable when character suites are limited and homoplastic.

show abstract

Phylogeny and Paleontology

Cited by 122 publications

References 16 publications

The importance of fossils in elucidating seed plant phylogeny and macroevolution

The importance of fossils in elucidating seed plant phylogeny and macroevolution

Paraphyletic groups in phylogenetic analysis: Progymnospermopsida and Préphanérogames in alternative views of seed plant relationships

Estimation of ancestry in planktonic foraminifera:Globoquadrina Dehiscens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About