Contrasting supertree and total-evidence methods: The origin of the pterosaurs

Zitteliana Reihe B: Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Staatssammlung fur Palaontologie und Geologie

Volumn , Issue 28, 2008, Pages 35-60

  Hone, David W E ^a,b,c   Benton, Michael J ^b  

^a BAYERISCHE STAATSSAMMLUNG FÜR PALÄONTOLOGIE UND GEOLOGIE   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^c Institute of Vertebrate Palaeontology and Paleoanthropology   (China)

Author keywords

Archosauria; Prolacertiformes; Supermatrix; Supertree; Total evidence

Indexed keywords

CLADISTICS; PALEONTOLOGY; PHYLOGENETICS; REPTILE;

ARCHOSAURIA; REPTILIA; SAURIA;

EID: 61849133389     PISSN: 16124138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. BARRATT, M., DONOGHUE M.J. & SOBER, E. (1991): Against consensus. - Systematic Zoology, 40:486-493.
2. BAUM, B. R. (1992): Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. - Taxon, 41:3-10.
3. BENNETT, S. C. (1996): The phylogenetic position of the Pterosauria within the Archosauromorpha. - Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 118:261-308.
4. BENTON, M. J. 1990. The species of Rhynchosaurus, a rhynchosaur (Reptilia, Diapsida) from the Middle Triassic of England. - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 328: 213-306.
5. BENTON, M.J. (1999): Scleromochlus taylori and the origin of dinosaurs and pterosaurs. -Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 354:1-25.
6. BENTON, M. J. (2004): Origin and relationships of Dinosauria. - In: D. B. WEISHAMPEL, P. DODSON & H. OSMOLSKA (Eds), The Dinosauria; Berkeley (University of California Press), 7-24.
7. BENTON, M. J. & ALLEN, J. L. (1997): Boreopricea from the Lower Triassic of Russia, and the relationships of the prolacertiform reptiles. - Palaeontology, 40:931-953.
8. BININDA-EMONDS, O. R. P. (2003): Novel versus unsupported clades: assessing the qualitative support for clades in MRP supertrees. - Systematic Biology, 52: 839-848.
9. BININDA-EMONDS, O. R. P. (2004a): The evolution of supertrees. - Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 19: 315-322.
10. BININDA-EMONDS, O. R. P. (2004b): Trees versus characters and the supertree/ supermatrix "paradox". - Systematic Biology, 53: 356-359.
11. BININDA-EMONDS, O. R. P., GITTLEMAN, J. L. & PURVIS, A. (1999): Building large trees by combining phylogenetic information: a complete phylogeny of the extant Carnivora (Mammalia). - Biology Review, 50: 565-579.
12. BININDA-EMONDS, O. R. P. & SANDERSON, M. J. (2001): Assessment of the accuracy of matrix representation with parsimony analysis supertree construction. - Systematic Biology, 50: 565-579.
13. DAVIES, T. J., BARRACLOUGH, T. G., CHASE, M. W., SOLTIS, P. S., SOLTIS, D. E. & SAVOI. AINEN, V. (2004): Darwin's abominable mystery: Insights from a supertree of the angiosperms. - Proceeding of the National Academy of Science, 101:1904-1909.
14. DE QUIEROZ, A., DONOGHUE, M. J. & KIM, J. (1995): Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. - Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 26: 657-681.
15. DILKES, D.W. (1998): The Early Triassic rhynchosaur Mesosuchus browni and the interrelationships of basal archosauromorph reptiles. - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 353: 501-541.
16. EVANS, S. E. (1988): The early history and relationships of the Diapsida, - In: M. J. BENTON (Ed.), The Phylogeny and Classification of the Tetrapoda. 1. Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds. Systematics Symposium Association Special Volume; Oxford (Clarendon Press), 221-260.
17. GATESEY, J. & SPRINGER, M. (2004): A critique of matrix representation with parsimony supertrees. - In: O. R. P. BININDA-EMONDS (Ed.), Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life; Dordrecht (Kluwer Academic Press), 369-388.
18. GAUTHIER, J. (1986): Saurischian monophyly and the origin of birds. - Memoirs of the California Academy of Science, 8:1-56.
19. HONE, D. W. E. (2005): The phylogenetics and macroevolution of the Archosauromorpha. - PhD thesis, University of Bristol, UK, 195pp.
20. HONE, D. W. E. & BENTON, M. J. (2007): An evaluation of the phylogenetic relationships of the pterosaurs among archosauromorph reptiles. -Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, 5:464-469.
21. HUELSENBECK, J. P., BULL, J. J. & CUNNINGHAM, C. W. (1996): Combining data in phylogenetic analysis. - Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 11:152-158.
22. JALIL, N. E. (1997): A new prolacertiform diapsid from the Triassic of North Africa and the interrelationships of the Prolacertiformes. -Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 17: 506-525.
23. KENNEDY, M. & PAGE, R. D. M. (2002): Seabird supertrees: Combining partial estimates of prolacertiform phylogeny. - Auk, 119: 88-108
24. KLUGE, A. G. (1989): A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). - Systematic Zoology, 38: 7-25.
25. KLUGE, A. G. (2004): On total evidence: for the record. - Cladistics, 20: 205-207.
26. MODESTO, S. P. & SUES, H-D. (2004): The skull of the Early Triassic archosauromorph reptile Prolacerta broomi and its phylogenetic significance. - Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 140: 335-351.
27. PISANI, D. &, WILKINSON, M. (2002): Matrix representation with parsimony, taxonomic congruence, and total evidence. - Systematic Biology, 51:151-155.
28. PISANI, D., YATES, A. M., LANGER, M. C. & BENTON, M. J. (2002): A genus-level supertree of the Dinosauria. - Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 269: 915-921.
29. PURVIS, A. (1995): A composite estimate of primate phylogeny. - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 348:405-421.
30. RAGAN, M. A. (1992): Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. -Molecular Phylogenetic Evolution, 1: 53-58.
31. RONQUIST, F. (1996). Matrix representation of trees, redundancy and weighting. - Systematic Biology, 45:247-253.
32. RUTA, M., JEFFERY, J. E. & COATES, M. I. (2003): A supertree of early tetrapods. - Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 270:2507-2516.
33. SANDERSON, M. J., PURVIS, A. & HEINZE, C. (1998): Phylogenetic supertrees: Assembling the trees of life. - Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 13:105-109.
34. SERENO, P. C. (1991): Basal archosaurs: phylogenetic relationships and functional implications. - Society of Vertebrate Palaeontology Memoirs 2: Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 11:1-53.
35. SMITH, A. B. (1994): Systematics and the Fossil Record; Oxford (Blackwell Science), 223 pp.
36. SWOFFORD, D. L. (1998): PAUP* Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and other methods), version 4. Sinauer, Massachusetts.
37. THORLEY, J. L. & PAGE, R. D. M. (2000): RadCon: phylogenetic tree comparison and consensus. - Bioinformatics, 16:486-487.
38. Unwin, D. M. (2005): The Pterosaurs: from deep time; New York, USA (Pi Press), 347 pp.
39. WILKINSON, M. & BENTON, M. J. (1995): Sphenodontid phylogeny and the problem of multiple trees. - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 351:1-16.
40. WILKINSON, M., COTTON, J. A., CREEVEY, C., EULENSTEIN, O., HARRIS, S. R., LAPOINTE, F-J., LEVASSEUR, C., MCINERNEY, J. O., PISANI, D. & THORLEY, J. L. (2005): The shape of supertrees to come: tree shape related properties of fourteen supertree methods. - Systematic Biology, 54:419-431.
41. WILKINSON, M., THORLEY, J. L., LITTLEWOOD, D. T. J. & BRAY, R. A. (2001): Towards a phylogenetic supertree for the Platyhelminthes? - In: D. T. J. LITTLEWOOD & R. A. BRAY (Eds), Interrelationships of the Platyhelminthes; London (Chapman-Hall), 292-301.