on a recent paper on phylogeny

Subject: on a recent paper on phylogeny
From: (John Leonard)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 09:02:27 +1000 (EST)
What fascinates me about new phylogenies of birds is this, that whatever new
arrangements are proposed they tend to leave the families intact. Indeed
once confusing simialrities owing to convergence are eliminated (ie
Australian Treecreepers v Old World treecreepers), it seems that what we are
left with is a array of families in which there are few doubts as to
relatedness, all the debate is about higher relations.

David James reports of this author that he separates Pigeons from
Sandgrouse, which is not surprising, as Sandgrouse don't look much like

Which leads me back to a hobby-horse of mine, which si that any ordering of
birds that attempts to incorporate a phylogeny is doomed, because such an
order is bound to keep on changing. Therefore what we need is a wholly
artificial order of the bird fmailies in alphabetical order, which would not
change so much.


John Leonard (Dr),
PO Box 243,
Woden, ACT 2606

"The world is currently experiencing technical problems. 
Please do not adjust your brains."

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU