Molecules, morphology, and the monophyly of diapsid reptiles

Contributions to Zoology

Volumn 70, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 1-22

  Lee, Michael S Y ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Cladistics; Fossils; Molecular phylogenetics; Osteology; Reptilia; Testudines

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035605630     PISSN: 00678546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/18759866-07001001     Document Type: Review

References (82)

1. Archie JW. 1989. A randomization test for phylogenetic information in systematic data. Syst. Zool. 38: 219-252.
2. Baker RH, Yu X, DeSalle R. 1998. Assessing the relative contribution of molecular and morphological characters in simultaneous analysis trees. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 9: 427-436.
3. Ballard JW, Thayer MK, Newton AF Jr., Grismer ER. 1998. Data sets, partitions and characters: philosophies and procedures for analysing multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 47: 367-396.
4. Barrett M, Donoghue MJ, Sober E. 1991. Against consensus. Syst. Biol. 40: 486-493.
5. Benton MJ. 1984. The relationships and early evolution of the Diapsida. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 52: 575-596.
6. Benton MJ. 1985. Classification and phylogeny of the diapsid reptiles. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 84: 97-164.
7. Benton MJ. 1996. Vertebrate Palaeontology: Biology and Evolution. Second Edition. London: Unwin Hyman.
8. Benton MJ, Clarke JM. 1988. Archosaur phylogeny and the relationships of the Crocodylia. In: Benton MJ, ed. The Phylogeny and Classification of the Tetrapods. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 295-338.
9. Bininda-Emonds OR, Bryant HN, Russell AP. 1998. Supraspecific taxa as terminals in cladistic analysis: implicit assumptions of monophyly and a comparison of methods. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 64: 101-133.
10. Boonstra LD. 1932. Pareiasaurian studies. Part VIII. The osteology and myology of the locomotor apparatus. Part B. Fore limb. Ann. S. Afr. Mus. 28: 436-503.
11. Bremer K. 1988. The Limits of Amino Acid Sequence Data in Angiosperm Phylogenetic Reconstruction. Evolution 42: 795-803.
12. Broom R. 1932. The Mammal-like Reptiles of South Africa and the Origin of Reptiles. London: F. and G. Witherby.
13. Bull JJ, Huelsenbeck JP, Cunningham CW, Swofford DL, Waddel PJ. 1993. Partitioning and combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42: 384-397.
14. Carpenter JM. 1996. Uninformative bootstrapping. Cladistics 12: 177-181.
15. Carroll RL. 1988. Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution. New York: W. H. Freeman.
16. Caspers GJ, Reindeers GJ, Leunissen JA, Watte J, de Jong WW. 1996. Protein sequences indicate that turtles branched off from the amniote tree after mammals. J. Mol. Evol. 42: 580-586.
17. Cunningham CW. 1997. Can three incongruence tests predict when data should be combined? Mol. Biol. Evol. 14: 733-740.
18. DeBraga M, Reisz RR. 1996. The early Permian reptile Acleisthorhinus pteroticus and its phylogenetic position. J. Vert. Paleont. 16: 384-395.
19. DeBraga M, Rieppel O. 1997. Reptile phylogeny and the affinities of turtles. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 120: 281-354.
20. Dilkes DW. 1998. The early Triassic rhynchosaur Mesosuchus browni and the interrelationships of basal archosauromorph reptiles. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 353: 501-541.
21. Donoghue MJ, Doyle JA, Gauthier J, Kluge AG, Rowe T. 1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20: 431-460.
22. Eernisse DJ, Kluge AG. 1993. Taxonomic congruence versus total evidence, and amniote phylogeny inferred from fossils, molecules and morphology. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10: 1170-1195.
23. Evans SE. 1984. The classification of the Lepidosauria. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 82: 87-100.
24. Evans SE. 1987. The braincase of Youngina capensis (Reptilia: Diapsida; Permian). N. Jahrb. Geol. Paläont. Monats. 1984: 193-203.
25. Evans SE. 1988. The early history and relationships of the Diapsida. In: Benton MJ, ed. The Phylogeny and Classification of the Tetrapods. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 221-260.
26. Faith DP, Cranston PS. 1991. Could a cladogram this short have arisen by chance alone? On permutation tests for cladistic structure. Cladistics 7: 1-28.
27. Farris JS, Källersjö M, Kluge AG, Bult C. 1994. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10: 315-319.
28. Felsenstein J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach utilizing the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791.
29. Gaffney ES. 1980. Phylogenetic relationships of the major groups of amniotes. In: Panchen AL, ed. The Terrestrial Environment and the Origin of Land Vertebrates. New York: Academic Press, 593-610.
30. Gaffney ES. 1990. The comparative osteology of the Triassic turtle Proganochelys. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 194: 1-263.
31. Gaffney ES, Meylan PA. 1988. A phylogeny of turtles. In: Benton MJ, ed. The Phylogeny and Classification of Tetrapods. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 157-219.
32. Gardiner BG. 1982. Tetrapod classification. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 74: 207-232.
33. Gardiner BG. 1993. Haematothermia: warm-blooded amniotes. Cladistics 9: 369-395.
34. Gauthier, J. 1984. A cladistic analysis of the higher systematic categories of the Diapsida. Ph.D dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
35. Gauthier J, Kluge AG, Rowe T. 1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics 4: 105-209.
36. Gow CE. 1972. The osteology and relationships of the Millerettidae (Reptilia: Cotylosauria). J. Zool. 167: 219-264.
37. Gow CE. 1975. The morphology and relationships of Youngina capensis Broom and Prolacerta broomi Parrington. Palaeont. Afr. 18: 89-131.
38. Gower DJ, Weber E. 1998. The braincase of Euparkeria, and the evolutionary relationships of birds and crocodilians. Biol. Rev. 73: 367-412.
39. Graham SW, Kohn JR, Morton BR, Eckenwalder JE, Barrett SCH. 1999. Phylogenetic congruence and discordance among one morphological and three molecular data sets from Pontederiaceae. Syst. Biol. 47: 545-567.
40. Gregory WK. 1946. Pareiasaurs versus placodonts as near ancestors to the turtles. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 86: 276-323.
41. Hedges SB, Poling LL. 1999. A molecular phylogeny of reptiles. Science 283: 998-1001.
42. Ivachnenko MF. 1987. [Permian parareptiles of the USSR]. Trudy Pal. Inst. Acad. Nauk SSSR 223: 3-160. In Russian.
43. Juul L. 1994. The phylogeny of basal archosaurs. Palaeont. Afr. 31: 1-39.
44. Kemp TS. 1982. Mammal-like reptiles and the origin of mammals. London: Academic Press.
45. Kemp TS. 1988. Haemothermia or Archosauria?: The interrelationships of mammals, birds and crocodiles. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 92: 67-104.
46. Kumazawa Y, Nishida M. 1999. Complete mitochondrial DNA sequences of the green turtle and blue-tailed mole skink: statistical evidence for archosaurian affinity of turtles. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16: 784-792.
47. Larson AR. 1994. The comparison of morphological and molecular data in phylogenetic systematics. In: Schierwater B, Steit B, Wagner GP, deSalle R, eds. Molecular ecology and evolution: approaches and applications. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag, 371-390.
48. Laurin M. 1991. The osteology of a Lower Permian eosuchian from Texas and a review of diapsid phylogeny. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 101: 59-95.
49. Laurin M, Reisz RR. 1995. A reevaluation of early amniote phylogeny. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 113: 165-223.
50. Lee MSY. 1995. Historical burden in systematics and interrelationships of "parareptiles". Biol. Rev. 70: 459-547.
51. Lee MSY. 1997. Reptile relationships turn turtle. Nature 389: 245-246.
52. Lee MSY. 1998. Convergent evolution and character correlation in burrowing reptiles: towards a resolution of squamate phylogeny. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 65: 369-453.
53. Lee MSY. 2000. Uninformative characters and apparent conflict between morphology and molecules. Mol. Biol. Evol. in press.
54. Løvtrup S. 1985. On the classification of the taxon Tetrapoda. Syst. Zool. 34: 463-470.
55. Marshall CR. 1992. Substitution bias, weighted parsimony, and amniote phylogeny as interred from 18S rRNA sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 9: 370-373.
56. Messenger SL, McGuire JA. 1998. Morphology, molecules and the phylogenetics of cetaceans. Syst. Biol. 47: 90-124.
57. Milinkovitch MC, Lyons-Weiler J. 1998. Finding optimal ingroup topologies and convexities when the choice of outgroups is not obvious. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 9: 348-357.
58. Motani R, Minoura N, Ando T. 1998. Ichthyosaurian relationships illuminated by new primitive skeletons from Japan. Nature 393: 255-257.
59. Nixon KC, Carpenter JM. 1996. On simultaneous analysis. Cladistics 12: 221-241.
60. Olmstead RG, Sweere JA. 1999. Combining data in phylogenetic systematics: an empirical approach using three molecular data sets in the Solanaceae. Syst. Biol. 43: 467-481.
61. Patterson C. 1981. Significance of fossils in determining evolutionary relationships. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 12: 195-223.
62. Reisz RR. 1981. A diapsid reptile from the Pennsylvanian of Kansas. Spec. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist., Univ. Kansas 7: 1-74.
63. Rieppel O, deBraga M. 1996. Turtles as diapsid reptiles. Nature 384: 453-455.
64. Rieppel O, Reisz RR. 1999. The origin and early evolution of turtles. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20: 1022.
65. Romer AS. 1966. Vertebrate Paleontology. Third Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
66. Romer AS, Price LI. 1940. Review of the Pelycosauria. Geol. Soc. Amer. Spec. Pap. 28: 1-538.
67. Rougier GW, de la Fuente MS, Areucci AB. 1995. Late Triassic turtles from South America. Science 268: 855-858.
68. Sereno PC. 1991. Basal archosaurs: phylogenetic relationships and functional implications. Soc. Vert. Pal. Memoir 2: 1-53.
69. Shaffer HB, Meylan P, McKnight ML. 1997. Tests of turtle phylogeny: molecular, morphological, and paleontological approaches. Syst. Biol. 46: 235-268.
70. Slowinski JB, Crother BI. 1998. Is the PTP test useful? Cladistics 14: 297-302.
71. Sorenson MR. 1996. TreeRot. Computer Program for Macintosh. Distributed by the author, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
72. Swofford DL. 1999. PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4. Sunderland MA: Sinauer Associates.
73. Templeton AR. 1983. Phylogenetic inference from restriction site endonuclease cleavage site maps with particular reference to the humans and apes. Evolution 37: 221-244.
74. Van de Peer Y, Neefs JM, de Rijk P, De Wachter R. 1993. Reconstructing evolution from eukaryotic small-ribosomal-subunit RNA sequences: calibration of the molecular clock. J. Mol. Evol. 37: 221-232.
75. Wiens JJ. 1998. The accuracy of methods for coding and sampling higher-level taxa for phylogenetic analysis: a simulation study. Syst. Biol. 47: 397-413.
76. Wiens JJ, Reeder TW. 1997. Phylogeny of the spiny lizards (Sceloporus) based on molecular and morphological evidence. Herp. Monog. 11: 1-101.
77. Wilkinson M, Thorley J, Benton MJ. 1997. Uncertain turtle relationships. Nature 387: 466.
78. Williston SW. 1917. The phytogeny and classification of reptiles. J. Geol. 25: 411-421.
79. Witmer LM. 1997. The evolution of the antorbital cavity of archosaurs: a study in soft-tissue reconstruction in the fossil record with an analysis of the function of pneumaticity. Mem. Soc. Vert. Paleont. 3: 1-73.
80. Yeates D. 1995. Why remove autapomorphies? Cladistics 8: 387-389.
81. Zardoya R, Meyer A. 1998. Complete mitochondrial genome indicates diapsid affinities of turtles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95: 14226-14231.
82. Zrzav'y J, Mihulka S, Kepka P, Bezdek A, Tietz D. 1998. Phylogeny of the Metazoa based on morphological and 18S ribosomal DNA evidence. Cladistics 14: 249-285.