1989
DOI: 10.2307/1466984
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the Classification and Phylogeny of Caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona), a Critical Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

2
107
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 139 publications
(109 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
2
107
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Only 5 of the 11 ingroup clades were supported by bootstrap proportions greater than 70% in both parsimony and distance analyses. However, the molecular trees were mostly consistent with prevailing views of caecilian phylogeny (Nussbaum and Wilkinson, 1989) and provided useful support and, to some extent, refinement of these views. Thus, these molecular data provide a good foundation upon which to build.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 74%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Only 5 of the 11 ingroup clades were supported by bootstrap proportions greater than 70% in both parsimony and distance analyses. However, the molecular trees were mostly consistent with prevailing views of caecilian phylogeny (Nussbaum and Wilkinson, 1989) and provided useful support and, to some extent, refinement of these views. Thus, these molecular data provide a good foundation upon which to build.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…Caecilians have distinctive, elongate and limbless body forms, and gymnophionan monophyly, which has never been seriously questioned, is supported by numerous morphological attributes (e.g., Nussbaum and Wilkinson, 1989). The vast majority of the approximately 160 currently recognized species are fossorial, inhabiting soils throughout much of the wet tropics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Thus we have no molecular phylogenetic insight into the relationships of any mainland African caecilians. Of the six currently recognised caecilian families (Nussbaum & Wilkinson 1989) only the Scolecomorphidae remains unstudied with regards to molecular data.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%