Morphological phylogenetics and the universe of useful characters

Taxon

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 5-7

  Lee, Michael S Y ^a,b  

^a SOUTH AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PHYLOGENETICS;

EID: 33645684053     PISSN: 00400262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/25065523     Document Type: Short Survey

References (18)

1. Caldwell, M. W. 1999. Squamate phylogeny and the relationships of snakes and mosasauroids. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 125: 115-147.
2. Estes, R., de Queiroz, K. & Gauthier, J. 1988. Phylogenetic relationships within Squamata. Pp. 119-281 in: Estes, R. & Pregill, G. (eds.), Phylogenetic Relationships of the Lizard Families. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford.
3. Farris, J. S. 1989. The Retention Index and the Rescaled Consistency Index. Cladistics 5: 417-419.
4. Jenner, R. A. 2004. Accepting partnership by submission? Morphological phylogenetics in the new millenium. Syst. Biol. 53: 333-342.
5. Kluge, A. G. & Farris, J. S. 1969. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool. 18: 1-32.
6. Lee, M. S. Y. 1997. The phylogeny of varanoid lizards and the affinities of snakes. Phil. Trans. Rov. Soc. Ser. B 352: 53-91.
7. Lee, M. S. Y. 1998. Convergent evolution and character correlation in burrowing squamates: a phylogenetic analysis. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 65: 369-453.
8. Lee, M. S. Y. 2004. Molecular and morphological data sets have similar numbers of relevant characters. Taxon 53: 1019-1022.
9. Lee, M. S. Y. 2005a. Squamate phylogeny, taxon sampling and data congruence. Organisms, Diversity and Evolution 5: 25-45.
10. Lee, M. S. Y. 2005b. Molecular evidence and snake origins. Biology Letters 1: 227-230.
11. Lee, M. S. Y. & Caldwell, M. W. 2000. Adriosaurus and the affinities of mosasaurs, dolichosaurs, and snakes. J. Paleont. 74: 915-937.
12. Olmstead, R. G. & Scotland, R. W. 2005. Molecular and morphological datasets. Taxon 54: 7-8.
13. Presch, W. 1988. Cladistic relationships with the Scincomorpha. Pp. 471-491 in: Estes, R. & Pregill, G. (eds.), Phylogenetic Relationships of the Lizard Families. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford.
14. Scotland, R. W., Olmstead, R. G. & Bennett, J. R. 2003. Phylogeny reconstruction: the role of morphology. Syst. Biol. 52: 539-548.
15. Smith, N. D. & Turner, A. H. 2005. Morphology's role in phylogeny reconstruction: perspectives from paleontology. Syst. Biol. 54: 166-173.
16. Townsend, T., Larson, A., E. Louis, E. & Macey, J. R. 2004. Molecular phylogenetics of Squamata: the position of snakes, amphisbenians, and dibamids, and the root of the squamate tree. Syst. Biol. 53: 735-757.
17. Wiens, J. J. 2004. The role of morphological data in phylogeny reconstruction. Syst. Biol. 53: 653-661.
18. Wu, X.-C., Brinkman, D. B. & Russell, A. P. 1996. Sineoamphisbaena hexatabularis, an amphisbaenian (Diapsida: Squamata) from the Upper Cretaceous redbeds at Bayan Mandahu (Inner Mongolia, People's Republic of China), and comments on the phylogenetic relationships of the Amphisbaenia. Can. J. Earth Sci. 33: 541-577.