On phylogenetic relationships within Dendrotriton (Amphibia: Caudata: Plethodontidae): Is there sufficient evidence?

Herpetological Journal

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 55-65

  Wilkinson, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DENDROTRITON;

EID: 0030921262     PISSN: 02680130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alroy, J. (1994). Four permutation tests for the presence of phylogenetic structure. Syst. Biol. 43, 430-437.
2. Archie, J. W. (1985). Methods for coding variable morphological features for numerical taxonomic analysis. Syst. Zool. 34, 326-345.
3. Archie, J. W. (1989a). A Randomiation test for phylogenetic information in systematic data. Syst. Zool. 38, 239-252.
4. Archie, J. W. (1989b). Homoplasy excess ratios: New indices for measuring levels of homoplasy in phylogenetic systematics and a critique of the consistency index. Syst. Zool. 38, 253-269.
5. Archie, J. W. (1989c). Phylogenies of plant families: a demonstration of phylogenetic randomness in DNA sequence data derived from proteins. Evolution 43, 1796-1800.
6. Bremer, K. (1988). The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution 42, 795-803.
7. Carpenter, J. M. (1992). Random cladistics. Cladistics 8, 147-153.
8. Colless, D. H. (1967). An examination of certain concepts in phenetic taxonomy. Syst. Zool. 16, 6-27.
9. Collins-Rainboth, A. & Buth, D. G. (1990). A reevaluation of the systematic relationships among species of the genus Dendrotriton (Caudata: Plethodontidae). Copeia 1990, 955-960.
10. Crovello, T. J. (1968). The effect of alteration of technique at two stages in a numerical taxonomic study. Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. 47, 761-768.
11. Donoghue, M. J., Olmstead, R. G., Smith, J. F., & Palmer, J. D. (1992). Phylogenetic relationships of Dipsacales based on rbcL sequence data. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 80, 672-685.
12. Faith, D. P. (1990). Chance marsupial relationships. Nature 345, 393-394.
13. Faith, D. P. & Cranston, P. S. (1991). Could a cladogram this short have arisen by chance alone?: On permutation tests for cladistic structure. Cladistics 7, 1-28.
14. Farris, J. S. (1988). Hennig86. Version 1.5. Software and Documentation. Distributed by the author. Port Jefferson Station, New York.
15. Farris, J. S. (1990). Phenetics in camouflage. Cladistics 6, 91-100.
16. Farris, J. S., Kluge, A. G. & Eckhardt, M. J. (1970). A numerical approach to phylogenetic systematics. Syst. Zool. 19, 172-189.
17. Fitch, W. M. (1979). Cautionary remarks on using gene expression events in parsimony procedures. Syst. Zool. 28, 375-379.
18. Hillis, D. M. (1991). Discriminating between phylogenetic signal and random noise in DNA sequences. In Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences, 278-294. Miyamoto, M. M. and Cracraft, J. (Eds.). Oxford: OUP.
19. Huelsenbeck, J. P. (1991). Tree-length distribution skewness: an indicator of phylogenetic information. Syst. Zool. 40, 257-270.
20. Källersjö, M., Farris, J. S. Kluge, A. G. & Bult, C. (1992). Skewness and permutation. Cladistics 8, 275-287.
21. Kluge, A. G. & Farris, J. S. (1969). Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool. 18, 1-32.
22. Le Quesne, W. J. (1989). Frequency distributions of lengths of possible networks from a data matrix. Cladistics 5, 395-407.
23. Lynch, J. F. & Wake, D. B. (1975). Systematics of the Chiropterotriton bromeliacia group (Amphibia: Caudata) with descriptions of two new species from Guatemala. Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co. 265, 1-45.
24. Lynch, J. F. & Wake, D. B. (1978). A new species Chiropterotriton (Amphibia: Caudata) from Bajab Verapaz, Guatemala, with comments on relationships among Central American species of the genus. Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co. 294, 1-22.
25. Sessions, S. K. & Kezer. J. (1991). Evolutionary cytogenetics of bolitoglossine salamanders (Family Plethodontidae). In Amphibian Cytogenetics and Evolution 89-129. S. K. Sessions and Green, D. M. (Eds.). San Diego: Academic Press.
26. Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. (1981). Biometry. San Francisco: Freeman.
27. Swofford, D. L. (1985). PAUP: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony. Version 2.4. Champaign, Illinois: Illinois Natural History Survey.
28. Swofford, D. L. (1993). PAUP: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony. Version 3.1.1. Champaign, Illinois: Illinois Natural History Survey.
29. Thiele, K. (1993). The holy grail of the perfect character: the cladistic treatment of morphometric data. Cladistics 9, 275-304.
30. Wake, D. B. (1991). Homoplasy: the result of natural selection, or evidence of design limitations. Am. Nat. 138, 543-567.
31. Wake, D. B. & Elias, P. 1983. New genera and a new species of Central American salamanders, with a review of the tropical genera (Amphibia, Caudata, Plethodontidae). Contrib. Sci. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Angeles Co. 345, 1-19.
32. Wilkinson, M. (1991). Homoplasy and parsimony analysis. Syst. Zool. 40, 107-109.
33. Wilkinson, M. (1992). Compatibility, consensus and missing data in phylogenetic inference. Unpubl. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Bristol, Bristol.
34. Wilkinson, M. (1994). Common cladistic information and its consensus representations: reduced Adams and reduced cladistic consensus trees and profiles. Syst. Biol. 43, 343-368.
35. Wilkinson, M. (1995). A comparison of two methods of character construction. Cladistics 11, 297-308.
36. Wilkinson, M. & Benton, M. J. (1996). Sphenodontid phylogeny and the problems of multiple trees. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 351, 1-16.