Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.
I think I'm understanding your position better now. It would seem that the only phylogenetic problem was in first saying that humans are not apes, thus CREATING the paraphyleticistic ( is that a word ?) view of the group called "Apes".
Once the descendent groups and ancestor are under the same name , it's a good monophyletic grouping.
I think I'm right, in the post above, because if this "current evidence", as suggested in Wiki, does suggest a split from the Chimp line...then Homo would more rightfully be a genus in the tribe Panini.
from which we separated more recently than the gorilla line
is also suggestive of a view that Gorillas would then be part of Pan-something
Plus I'm laying down my own rule; in order to be correct, monophylogeneticistically, in any of this, one must state any grouping attempt thusly: "All animals*..blah blah blah". Never like this: "All primates...blah blah blah".
* or perhaps "'All life forms"
Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to say.
Well, I haven't really studied the names of primate groups, but I'll trust that you did your research and say that it sounds good.
It's only the extant apes.
I'm considering making Bonobo the top of the heap...It's unlikely the Chimp line will be the source of any more species to come
For now I simply used genus or species common names ( Gorilla, Orang ) as "place holders"
I think the rules for monophylogeneticism must have wording inclusive enough to force exclusion of non-monophyletic groupings. That is, by structuring the wording so that it's "All animals..blah blah", I seek to exclude features due to convergent evolution. It works by first including all animals, and the wording that follows must do the excluding.
In the above, I think some groupings are good monophylogenetic groupings and some aren't ( but could be good groupings for work other than monophylogenetic type ) . I'll try to distinguish them using the terms given and my rule. As an example, offhand it seems "Panoidea" would be OK.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests