Primate Phylogeny: Morphological vs Molecular Results

Shoshani, Jeheskel; Groves, Colin P.; Simons, Elwyn L.; Gunnell, Gregg F.

doi:10.1006/mpev.1996.0009

Cited by 189 publications

(173 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

153

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the first comprehensive cladistic analysis of the higher-level phylogeny of all of the major extent groups of primates (18 genera) that included both molecular characters and a large number of morphology-based characters [28] was consistent with the tree shown in figure 1. The 264 morphology-based characters (mainly compiled from previous data) [29,30] used by Shoshani et al [28] included some soft-tissue data, but the vast majority of the characters were based on the hard tissue anatomy of various regions of the body.…”

Section: Role Of Myology In Systematic Biologysupporting

confidence: 70%

“…The 264 morphology-based characters (mainly compiled from previous data) [29,30] used by Shoshani et al [28] included some soft-tissue data, but the vast majority of the characters were based on the hard tissue anatomy of various regions of the body. Although Shoshani et al [28] stressed that their study was the first published report "based on a rigorous maximum parsimony computer analysis of a large data matrix on living Primates" to provide "morphological (cladistic) evidence" for the chimp-human clade, that clade structure was only weakly supported (e.g., their cladistic analysis had a bootstrap support value of just 42 (out of 100)."…”

Section: Role Of Myology In Systematic Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Major Reason to Study Muscle Anatomy: Myology as a Tool for Evolutionary, Developmental, and Systematic Biology

Diogo¹

2012

Biol Syst Open Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryMolecules are rapidly replacing morphology as the preferred source of evidence for generating phylogenetic hypotheses. Critics of morphology claim that most morphology-based characters are ambiguous, subjective and prone to homoplasy. In this paper we summarize the results of recent Bayesian and parsimony-based cladistic analyses of the gross muscle morphology of primates and of other animals that show that morphological evidence such as muscle-based data is as capable of recovering phylogenies as are molecular data. We also suggest that recent investigations of neural crest cells and muscle connectivity might help to explain why muscles provide particularly useful characters for inferring phylogenies. Lastly, we show how the inclusion of soft tissue-based information in phylogenetic investigations allows researchers to address evolutionary questions that are not tractable using molecular evidence alone, including questions about the evolution of our closest living relatives and of our own clade.

show abstract

Section: Role Of Myology In Systematic Biologysupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Role Of Myology In Systematic Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Major Reason to Study Muscle Anatomy: Myology as a Tool for Evolutionary, Developmental, and Systematic Biology

Diogo¹

2012

Biol Syst Open Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the observation of P. vivaxlike parasites in Africa does not reject the origin of P. vivax as Homo parasite in Asia. The lineage of P. vivax could be introduced in Asia by any of the primates that also had their origin in Africa (59,60), making possible the host switch from nonhuman primates to humans in Asia. Our data and the fact that fossils of Homo erectus have been found in Asia (61) indicate that the origin of P. vivax is part of the parasite speciation process that took place in the region in the last 2-3 My.…”

Section: Fig 1 Phylogenetic Relationship Among the 17mentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of primate malaria parasites based on the gene encoding cytochromebfrom the linear mitochondrial genome

Escalante

Freeland

Collins

et al. 1998

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

350

318

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report a phylogenetic analysis of primate malaria parasites based on the gene encoding the cytochrome b protein from the mitochondrial genome. We have studied 17 species of Plasmodium, including 14 parasitic in primates. In our analysis, four species were used for rooting the Plasmodium phylogenetic tree: two from closely related genera (Hepatocystis sp. and Haemoproteus columbae) and two other Apicomplexa (Toxoplasma gondii and Theileria parva). We found that primate malaria parasites form a monophyletic group, with the only exception being the Plasmodium falciparumPlasmodium reichenowi lineage. Phylogenetic analyses that include two species of non-Plasmodium Haemosporina suggest that the genus Plasmodium is polyphyletic. We conclude that the biologic traits, such as periodicity and the capacity to relapse, have limited value for assessing the phylogenetic relationships among Plasmodium species. For instance, we found no evidence that would link virulence with the age of the host-parasite association. Our studies also reveal that the primate malaria parasites originated in Africa, which contradicts the presently held opinion of Southeast Asia as their center of origin. We propose that the radiation of Asian monkey parasites is a recent event where several life history traits, like differences in periodicity, appeared de novo.

show abstract

“…-of comparisons of DNA sequences of Figure 1. The most parsimonious phylogeny of the Hominoidea, using 170 characters from the dataset of Shoshani et al (1996). Length 347, Consistency Index 0.65. just a few hundred base-pairs.…”

Section: 'Relatedness': At the Heart Of Taxonomic Statementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Groves & Patterson (1991) reworked the analysis using a computer program in several different ways. Recently, I revised the dataset again and used it as part of the dataset for a full cladistic analysis of Primates (Shoshani et al, 1996). Here I report the results of the hominoid-specific analysis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Humanity from African Naissance to Coming Millennia

Tobias¹,

Raath²,

Moggi‐Cecchi³

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The first 2.5 million years of hominid history is characterized by limited dispersals similar to those of the living great apes whose home range sizes very little between years. Unlike our closest relative Pan, who are particulary vulnerable during dispersal because the distribution of their resources is highly habitat specific and predation takes a relatively higher toll than it does in r-selected animals, hominids are widely dispersed after 1.8 Ma. Hominid dispersal must have entailed either a shift in the types of resources exploited or a technological advance to ensure resource availability or both. Using data from ecology, geochronology, morphology, and paleontology we assess the initial hominid dispersal from Africa and the relationship to patterns of dispersal in nonhuman primates and large mammals of both 'widely dispersing' and 'non-dispersing' species. The dispersal rates of Plio/Pleistocene hominids differ from those of nonhuman primates and are typical of widely-dispersing large mammals. In fact, H. erectus first appears in Java almost immediately after its appearence in Africa, yet its first appearence in Java is contemporaneous with that of Colobus, Macaca, and Pongo that had already inhabited mainland Asia for millions of years. Although the timing of the first hominid dispersal pre-dates significant technological advances, the energy required by larger hominid body/brain sizes suggest a shift to exploitation of highprotein packages that, according to correlation between faunal and chronometric sequences, is itself dispersing. These data suggest that it is at the origin of H. erectus (sensu lato) that our uniquely human dispersal capabilities began to emerge and that this dispersal is not primarily due to the technological innovation of the Acheulean tradition. IntroductionThe global distribution of Homo sapiens contrasts with the restricted ranges of our closest living primate relative, Pan. Yet for some three million years after our lineages diverged, both were apparently exclusively African phenomena, as Pan remains today. These current biogeographic differences are reflected in home range (HR) sizes that are some 15 to 100 times greater in recent human huntergatherers than in Pan. (23 hectares in Pan, 330-2600 in humans; Leonard and Robertson, 2000). Although an extensive literature considers the significance of the behavioral repertoire that allows the final, relatively late, dispersal of Homo sapiens into Australasia, North and South America, and Siberia (e.g., Lindly & Clark, 1990;Roberts et al., 1991; Davidson & Noble, 1992; Jelinek, 1994; Waters et al., 1997), the origin of this difference in dispersal patterns is not well understood.The original hominid dispersal from Africa has been viewed as a largely hominid (technologically) driven rather than ecologically driven phenomenon. Such scenarios are based on the idea that widely dispersed ex-African hominids are not found before 1.0 ma (Pope, 1983) or are not found before the development of the Acheulean (Wolpoff, 1999), and thus that th...

show abstract

Primate Phylogeny: Morphological vs Molecular Results

Cited by 189 publications

References 69 publications

A Major Reason to Study Muscle Anatomy: Myology as a Tool for Evolutionary, Developmental, and Systematic Biology

A Major Reason to Study Muscle Anatomy: Myology as a Tool for Evolutionary, Developmental, and Systematic Biology

The evolution of primate malaria parasites based on the gene encoding cytochromebfrom the linear mitochondrial genome

Humanity from African Naissance to Coming Millennia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About