Re: SV: 55 million year old parrot found/(Number-)Crunching _Mopsitta_ et al

[evelyn sobielski <koreke77@yahoo.de>]

On the subject of cladistic analyses: I am still pondering the issue of 
cladistic analyses of fragmentary material. If anyone can recommend background, 
theoretical or case studies that would enable one to make a cladistic analysis 
of taxa with an usually insufficient hypodigm which yields results that are at 
least *somewhat* resolved.

For example: _Graculavus_ looks very much like it's a charadriiform and  for 
the sake of simplicity I presume that this is not falsified in a preceding 
analysis. Now, taking a selection of taxa encompassing the morphological and 
phylogenetic diversity of the Charadrii, of the Scolopaci, of the Lari, etc, 
and adding _Graculavus_, and only scoring characters than are present in 
_Graculavus_: would
a) clades resolve according to the existing consensus and would
b) _Graculavus_ tend to join a particular one of these, or would it float 
around aimlessly at the charadriiform base?

Of course the results are likely to be negative for many taxa. But even that 
improves our understanding, as it points out characters of dubious value in a 
qualitative argument. And there can be other benefits. For example the analysis 
run in the description of _Piksi_ pointed out a technically possible scenario 
that remains untested: that _Telmatornis_ is a member of the Mirandornithes 
predating the flamingo-grebe split. And that therefore any study of 
_Telmatornis_ is very well advised to include grebes and the most ancient 
Phoenicopteriformes.


Thanks in advance,

Eike


      __________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail.
Dem pfiffigeren Posteingang.
http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com