Re: pterosaur femora sprawl

[Mike Habib <habib@jhmi.edu>]

> It's true there aren't any recognized flightless stem-bats, but what  
> do you mean by "enormous range"? Archonta is dead, including the  
> "flying primate" hypothesis, and the sister-group relationship of  
> Chiroptera and Zooamata (Ferae + Perissodactyla) is supported by  
> molecular data, including LINE insertion sites. Have I missed  
> something?


Granted, the sister taxon relationship Chiroptera and Zooamata is  
supported by the current molecular data, but I think you'll find that  
many workers still consider some version of the Archonta hypothesis  
viable (morphologists, in particular), and in any case I'm not ready  
to throw in my chips on any single topology at the moment given the  
sheer number of sister-group relationships for bats that have been  
proposed in the past 8 to 10 years (that's not to say that I disagree  
with the most recent LINE insertion work, but merely to say that I  
don't consider it a silver bullet).  Yes, I realize that is going back  
pretty far for systematics work, especially for molecular systematics,  
but most recent does not necessarily mean most accurate.  I would  
argue that there are still several competing hypotheses for bat  
origins, even if one of them happens to be a bit better supported than  
the others at present (or even much better supported).  Do you  
consider the placement of Chiroptera to be a "done deal" at present?

Cheers,

--Mike



Michael Habib, M.S.
PhD. Candidate
Center for Functional Anatomy and Evolution
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
1830 E. Monument Street
Baltimore, MD 21205
(443) 280-0181
habib@jhmi.edu