Book contents
-
Frontmatter
-
Contents
-
Contributors
-
Preface
-
Acknowledgements
- 1
Introduction to Carnivora
- 2
Phylogeny of the Carnivora and Carnivoramorpha, and the use of the fossil record to enhance understanding of evolutionary transformations
- 3
Phylogeny of the Viverridae and ‘Viverrid-like’ feliforms
- 4
Molecular and morphological evidence for Ailuridae and a review of its genera
- 5
The influence of character correlations on phylogenetic analyses: a case study of the carnivoran cranium
- 6
What's the difference? A multiphasic allometric analysis of fossil and living lions
- 7
Evolution in Carnivora: identifying a morphological bias
- 8
The biogeography of carnivore ecomorphology
- 9
Comparative ecomorphology and biogeography of Herpestidae and Viverridae (Carnivora) in Africa and Asia
- 10
Ecomorphological analysis of carnivore guilds in the Eocene through Miocene of Laurasia
- 11
Ecomorphology of North American Eocene carnivores: evidence for competition between Carnivorans and Creodonts
- 12
Morphometric analysis of cranial morphology in pinnipeds (Mammalia, Carnivora): convergence, ecology, ontogeny, and dimorphism
- 13
Tiptoeing through the trophics: geographic variation in carnivoran locomotor ecomorphology in relation to environment
- 14
Interpreting sabretooth cat (Carnivora; Felidae; Machairodontinae) postcranial morphology in light of scaling patterns in felids
- 15
Cranial mechanics of mammalian carnivores: recent advances using a finite element approach
-
Index
-
Plates
- References
2 - Phylogeny of the Carnivora and Carnivoramorpha, and the use of the fossil record to enhance understanding of evolutionary transformations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 July 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction to Carnivora
- 2 Phylogeny of the Carnivora and Carnivoramorpha, and the use of the fossil record to enhance understanding of evolutionary transformations
- 3 Phylogeny of the Viverridae and ‘Viverrid-like’ feliforms
- 4 Molecular and morphological evidence for Ailuridae and a review of its genera
- 5 The influence of character correlations on phylogenetic analyses: a case study of the carnivoran cranium
- 6 What's the difference? A multiphasic allometric analysis of fossil and living lions
- 7 Evolution in Carnivora: identifying a morphological bias
- 8 The biogeography of carnivore ecomorphology
- 9 Comparative ecomorphology and biogeography of Herpestidae and Viverridae (Carnivora) in Africa and Asia
- 10 Ecomorphological analysis of carnivore guilds in the Eocene through Miocene of Laurasia
- 11 Ecomorphology of North American Eocene carnivores: evidence for competition between Carnivorans and Creodonts
- 12 Morphometric analysis of cranial morphology in pinnipeds (Mammalia, Carnivora): convergence, ecology, ontogeny, and dimorphism
- 13 Tiptoeing through the trophics: geographic variation in carnivoran locomotor ecomorphology in relation to environment
- 14 Interpreting sabretooth cat (Carnivora; Felidae; Machairodontinae) postcranial morphology in light of scaling patterns in felids
- 15 Cranial mechanics of mammalian carnivores: recent advances using a finite element approach
- Index
- Plates
- References
Summary
Introduction
Phylogeny of the Carnivora – molecules, fossils, and total evidence
Fossil taxa are inherently at a disadvantage in resolving phylogenetic relationships, relative to living forms, as soft anatomy, DNA, physiology, and most life-history attributes are not readily available for the vast majority of these taxa, other than some fascinating new sequences available for Pleistocene fossil taxa (e.g. Smilodon, Homotherium, Miracinonyx, Ursus spelaeus, etc.; Loreille et al., 2001; Barnett et al., 2005). Nevertheless, fossil data possess several key advantages in phylogenetic analyses, including the ability to break-up ‘long branches’ in phylogenies, where the divergence between modern-day clades occurred deep in geological time. Fossils preserve morphologies that can become obscured along these long branches, and also provide temporal context for the evolution of living clades that may be crucial for accurately reconstructing ancestral conditions and partitioning synapomorphic versus homoplasious resemblances among modern-day taxa. Some workers feel that molecular data are inherently superior for reconstructing phylogeny than morphological characters (see for example: Scotland et al., 2003; but see Jenner, 2004), and as a consequence, phylogenies for many clades, particularly those that are not well represented in the fossil record, often are based solely on molecular sequence data. Within Carnivora, for example, the most recent studies reconstructing phylogenetic relationships among living taxa have relied principally on molecular sequences (e.g. Flynn et al., 2000, 2005).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
-
Carnivoran EvolutionNew Views on Phylogeny, Form and Function, pp. 25 - 63Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010
References
(1998). Cope's rule and the dynamics of body mass evolution in North American fossil mammals. Science, 280, 731–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1993). Body-mass in large extant and extinct carnivores. Journal of Zoology, 231, 339–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2007). Phylogeny of the sea spiders (Arthropoda, Pycnogonida) based on direct optimization of six loci and morphology. Cladistics, 23, 255–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (1995). A molecular view of pinniped relationships with particular emphasis on the true seals. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 40, 78–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2006). Pinniped phylogeny and a new hypothesis for their origin and dispersal. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 41, 345–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2007). Mitogenomic analyses of caniform relationships. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 45, 863–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2007). A web-database of mammalian morphology and a reanalysis of placental phylogeny. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2007, 7, 108 (10 pages; doi 10.1186/1471–2148–7–108).Google Scholar
, and (2005). New material of Centetodon (Mammalia, Lipotyphla) and the importance of (missing) DNA sequences in systematic paleontology. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 25, 911–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997). Multiple sources of character information and the phylogeny of Hawaiian drosophilids. Systematic Biology, 46, 654–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2005). A molecular phylogeny of the Canidae based on six nuclear loci. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 37, 815–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2005). Evolution of the extinct sabretooths and the American cheetah-like cat. Current Biology, 15(15), R589–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2006). Marine Mammals: Evolutionary Biology, 2nd edn. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 560 pp.Google Scholar
and (2006). A total evidence assessment of the phylogeny of North American euctenizine trapdoor spiders (Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Cyrtaucheniidae) using Bayesian inference. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 41, 70–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (1978). Hierarchical linear modeling of the tempo and mode of evolution. Paleobiology, 4, 120–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Phylogenetic relationships and systematics of the Nimravidae (Carnivora). Journal of Mammalogy, 72, 56–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2002). Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. New York, NY: Springer, 488 pp.Google Scholar
and (eds.) (2007). Phylocode. International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature, version 4b (12 September 2007; ).
, , and (1999). Energetic constraints on the diet of terrestrial carnivores. Nature, 402, 286–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1939) Miacis gracilis, a new carnivore from the Uinta Eocene. Annals of Carnegie Museum, 27, 349–70.Google Scholar
(1987). Problems of body weight estimation in fossil Primates. International Journal of Primatology, 8, 115–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1880). On the genera of the Creodonta. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 19, 76–82.Google Scholar
and (1992). Estimating the body size of Eocene Primates: A comparison of results from dental and postcranial variables. International Journal of Primatology, 13, 307–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2007). Phylogenetic reconstruction of carnivore social organizations. Journal of Zoology, 273, 90–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1990). Introduction: body size and its estimation. In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology, ed. and . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
, , , and (2004). A phylogeny of the extant Phocidae inferred from complete mitochondrial DNA coding regions. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 33, 363–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1964). The giant panda: a morphological study of evolutionary mechanisms. Fieldiana Zoology Memoirs, 3: 1–339.Google Scholar
and (2005). A phylogeny of the Caniformia (order Carnivora) based on 12 complete protein-coding mitochondrial genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 37, 192–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , and (2000). Body mass in Cercopithecidae (Primates, Mammalia): estimation and scaling in extinct and extant taxa. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 83, 1–159.Google Scholar
, , , et al. (2002). Molecular phylogeny of living xenarthrans and the impact of character and taxon sampling on the placental tree rooting. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 19, 1656–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (1993). Phylogenetic relationships among the skunks: a molecular perspective. Journal of Mammalian Evolution, 1(4), 255–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997). Systematics of mustelid-like carnivores. Journal of Mammalogy, 78, 426–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1998). Neocortex size predicts group size in carnivores and some insectivores. Ethology, 104, 695–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1990). The behavioral/ecological significance of body size in the Mammalia. In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology, ed. and . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 25–37.Google Scholar
, and (2001). Comparative context of Plio-Pleistocene hominin brain evolution. Journal of Human Evolution, 41, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1985). Phylogenies and the comparative method. American Naturalist, 125, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2006). Estimation of endocranial volume through the use of external skull measures in the Carnivora (Mammalia). Journal of Mammalogy, 87, 1027–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2007). Mechanisms behind active trends in body size evolution in the Canidae (Carnivora: Mammalia). American Naturalist, 170, 876–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008a). Testing hypotheses of the evolution of brain–body size scaling in the Canidae (Carnivora, Mammalia). Paleobiology, 34, 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008b). A total evidence phylogeny of the Arctoidea (Carnivora: Mammalia): relationships among basal taxa. Journal of Mammalian Evolution, 15, 231–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). Ancestral state reconstruction of body size in the Caniformia (Carnivora, Mammalia): the effects of incorporating data from the fossil record. Systematic Biology, 55, 301–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2007). The evolution of encephalization in caniform carnivorans. Evolution, 61, 1758–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1996). Phylogeny and rates of evolution: morphological, taxic and molecular. In Carnivore Behavior, Ecology, and Evolution, Vol. 2, ed. . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 542–81.Google Scholar
(1998). Early Cenozoic Carnivora (‘Miacoidea’). In Evolution of Tertiary Mammals of North America (Vol. 1: Terrestrial Carnivores, Ungulates, and Ungulatelike Mammals), ed. , and . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 110–23.
and (1982). Phylogeny of Early Tertiary Carnivora, with a description of a new species of Protictis from the Middle Eocene of Northwestern Wyoming. American Museum Novitates, 2725, 1–64.Google Scholar
and (1988). Letter to the Editor [re: S. J. O'Brien, ‘The ancestry of the giant panda’, Scientific American, November, 1987]. Scientific American, June 1988, 8.
and (1998). Phylogeny of the Carnivora (Mammalia): congruence vs. incompatibility among multiple data sets. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 9, 414–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2005). Carnivora. In Origin, Timing, and Relationships of the Major Clades of Extant Placental Mammals, ed. , and . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 175–98.Google Scholar
, and (1988). Phylogeny of the Carnivora. In Phylogeny and Classification of the Tetrapods, ed. . Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 73–116.Google Scholar
, , and (2000). Whence the red panda? Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 17, 190–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and (2005). Molecular phylogeny of the Carnivora (Mammalia): assessing the impact of increased sampling on resolving enigmatic relationships. Systematic Biology, 54, 317–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2007). An ecomorphological analysis of extant small carnivorans. Journal of Zoology, 272, 82–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). Molecular phylogeny of the Arctoidea (Carnivora): effect of missing data on supertree and supermatrix analyses of multiple gene data sets. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 41, 165–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2007). Novel phylogeny of the raccoon family (Procyonidae: Carnivora) based on nuclear and mitochondrial DNA evidence. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 43, 1171–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , and (2005). Historical biogeography and phylogeny of monachine seals (Pinnipedia: Phocidae) based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data. Journal of Biogeography, 32, 1267–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2000). Using the past to predict the present: confidence intervals for regression equations in phylogenetic comparative methods. American Naturalist, 155, 346–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (1999). An introduction to phylogenetically based statistical methods, with a new method for confidence intervals on ancestral values. American Zoologist, 39, 374–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2005). Hidden likelihood support in genomic data: can forty-five wrongs make a right?Systematic Biology, 54, 483–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2001). Deciphering whale origins with molecules and fossils. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16, 562–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (2003). Combined support for wholesale taxic atavism in gavialine crocodylians. Systematic Biology, 52, 403–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2007). Re-assessed molecular phylogeny and evolutionary scenario within genets (Carnivora, Viverridae, Genettinae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 44, 920–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). Phylogenetic systematics and tempo of evolution of the Viverrinae (Mammalia, Carnivora, Viverridae) within feliformians: implications for faunal exchanges between Asia and Africa. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 41, 266–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2003). Exhaustive sample set among Viverridae reveals the sister-group of felids: the linsangs as a case of extreme morphological convergence within Feliformia. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B Biological Sciences, 270, 2523–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1977). Correlation of tooth size and body size in living hominoid primates, with a note on relative brain size in Aegyptopithecus and Proconsul. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 47, 395–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1990). Prediction of body mass in mammalian species from long bone lengths and diameters. Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, The University of Michigan, 28, 79–92.Google Scholar
, and (1982). Allometric scaling in the dentition of Primates and prediction of body weight from tooth size in fossils. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 58, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2001). Arthropod phylogeny based on eight molecular loci and morphology. Nature, 413, 157–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1986a). Carnivore brain size, behavioral ecology, and phylogeny. Journal of Mammalogy, 67, 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1986b). Carnivore life history patterns: allometric, phylogenetic, and ecological associations. American Naturalist, 127, 744–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Carnivore olfactory bulb size: allometry, phylogeny and ecology. Journal of Zoology, 225, 253–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1993). Carnivore life histories: a reanalysis in light of new models. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London, 65, 65–86.Google Scholar
(1994). Female brain size and parental care in carnivores. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 91, 5495–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1982). Carnivore home-range size, metabolic needs and ecology. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 10, 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1998). Body size and species-richness in carnivores and primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences, 265, 113–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1997). Sexual dimorphism in the canines and skulls of carnivores: effects of size, phylogeny, and behavioral ecology. Journal of Zoology, 242, 97–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2006). Phylogenetic systematics of dart-poison frogs and their relatives (Amphibia: Athesphatanura: Dendrobatidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 299, 1–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998). Creodonta. In Evolution of Tertiary Mammals of North America (Vol. 1: Terrestrial Carnivores, Ungulates, and Ungulatelike Mammals), ed. , and . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91–109.Google Scholar
, and (1991). Mammalian metabolism and life histories. American Naturalist, 137, 556–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). Postcranial anatomy of Viverravus (Mammalia, Carnivora) and implications for substrate use in basal Carnivora. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 26, 422–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1995). Partial skeleton from the primitive carnivoran Miacis petilus from the early Eocene of Wyoming. Journal of Mammalogy, 76, 148–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997). Postcranial morphology and locomotor behaviour of two early Eocene miacoid carnivorans, Vulpavus and Didymictis. Palaeontology, 40, 279–305.Google Scholar
, , and (2007). Phylogeny and divergence of the pinnipeds (Carnivora: Mammalia) assessed using a multigene dataset. BMC (BioMed Central) Evolutionary Biology, 7, 216 (doi:10.1186/1471–2148–7–216, 19 pages).Google Scholar
. (1977). Basicranial anatomy of Cynelos Jourdan (Mammalia: Carnivora), an Aquitanian amphicyonid from the Allier Basin, France. Journal of Paleontology, 51, 826–43.Google Scholar
. (1987). Evolution of the aeluroid Carnivora: significance of auditory structure in the nimravid cat Dinictis. American Museum Novitates, 2886, 1–74.Google Scholar
. (1996). Amphicyonidae. In The Terrestrial Eocene–Oligocene Transition in North America, ed. and . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 476–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1999). Brain size is not correlated with forelimb dexterity in fissiped carnivores (Carnivora): a comparative test of the principle of proper mass. Brain Behavior and Evolution, 54, 167–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1977). Hip structure and locomotion in ambulatory and cursorial carnivores. Journal of Zoology, 181, 351–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2004). Accepting partnership by submission? Morphological phylogenetics in a molecular millennium. Systematic Biology, 52, 333–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1961). Quantitative analysis of evolution of the brain in mammals. Science, 133, 1012–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1970). Brain evolution: new light on old principles. Science, 170, 1224–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1973). Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence. New York, NY: Academic Press, 482 pp.Google Scholar
(1991). Brain Size and the Evolution of Mind. New York, NY: American Museum of Natural History, 99 pp.Google Scholar
, , , et al. (2006). The Late Miocene radiation of modern Felidae: a genetic assessment. Science, 311, 73–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1990). Problems and methods in reconstructing body size in fossil Primates. In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology, ed. and . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 103–18.Google Scholar
and (2007). Site specific rates of mitochondrial genomes and the phylogeny of eutheria. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 7, 8 (doi:10.1186/1471–2148–7–8).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , and (2006). Molecular systematics of the Hyaenidae: relationships of a relictual lineage resolved by a molecular supermatrix. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 38, 603–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2007). Phylogeny of the Procyonidae (Mammalia: Carnivora): molecules, morphology and the Great American Interchange. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 43, 1076–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1986). Analysis of mammalian communities from the late Eocene and Oligocene of southern France. Palaeovertebrata, 16, 191–212.Google Scholar
and (1988). Correlation of carnassial tooth size and body weight in Recent carnivores (Mammalia). Historical Biology, 1, 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (1995). Use of spectral analysis to test hypotheses on the origin of pinnipeds. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 12, 28–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , and (2001). Ancient DNA analysis reveals divergence of the cave bear, Ursus spelaeus, and brown bear, Ursus arctos, lineages. Current Biology, 11, 200–03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1991). Squared-change parsimony reconstructions of ancestral states for continuous-valued characters on a phylogenetic tree. Systematic Zoology, 40, 304–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2007). Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 2.01.
(2007). From fossils to molecules: phylogeny and the core eudicot floral groundplan in Hamamelidoideae (Hamamelidaceae, Saxifragales). Systematic Botany, 32, 317–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2007). Phylogeny of extant and fossil Juglandaceae inferred from the integration of molecular and morphological data sets. Systematic Biology, 56, 412–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1998). A comparison of encephalization between odontocete cetaceans and anthropoid primates. Brain Behavior and Evolution, 51, 230–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2004). Origin and evolution of large brains in toothed whales. Anatomical Record Part A – Discoveries in Molecular Cellular and Evolutionary Biology, 281A, 1247–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004). Phylogeny, evolutionary history and taxonomy of the Mustelidae based on sequences of the cytochrome b gene and a complex repetitive flanking region. Zoologica Scripta, 33(6), 481–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1981). Relative brain size and basal metabolic-rate in terrestrial vertebrates. Nature, 293, 57–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1984). Body size, brain size and feeding strategies. In Food Acquisition and Processing in Primates, ed. , and . New York, NY: Plenum Press, pp. 73–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1990). Primate Origins and Evolution: A Phylogenetic Reconstruction. London: Chapman and Hall, 828 pp.Google Scholar
(1996). Scaling of the mammalian brain: the maternal energy hypothesis. News in Physiological Sciences, 11, 149–56.Google Scholar
, and (2005). Problems of allometric scaling analysis: examples from mammalian reproductive biology. Journal of Experimental Biology, 208, 1731–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1909). The Carnivora and Insectivora of the Bridger Basin, middle Eocene. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History, 9, 289–567.Google Scholar
(1988). Complications inherent in scaling the basal rate of metabolism in mammals. Quarterly Review of Biology, 63, 25–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1994). Mechanisms of large-scale evolutionary trends. Evolution, 48, 1747–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2004a). Body size of insular carnivores: little support for the island rule. American Naturalist, 163, 469–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2004b). Carnivores, biases and Bergmann's rule. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81, 579–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1885). On the anatomy, classification and distribution of the Arctoidea. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 23, 340–404.Google Scholar
, and (2004). A new species of Prosansanosmilus: implications for the systematic relationships of the family Barbourofelidae new rank (Carnivora, Mammalia). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 140, 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2005). Basal metabolic rate in carnivores is associated with diet after controlling for phylogeny. Physiological and Biochemical Zoology, 78, 1039–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1998). Canidae. In Evolution of Tertiary Mammals of North America (Vol. 1: Terrestrial Carnivores, Ungulates, and Ungulatelike Mammals), ed. , and . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 124–43.Google Scholar
, , , , and (2001). Molecular phylogenetics and the origins of placental mammals. Nature, 409, 614–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and (2007). Using genomic data to unravel the root of the placental mammal phylogeny. Genome Research, 17, 413–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2004). Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of combined data. Systematic Biology, 53, 47–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1999). Parsimony analysis of total evidence from extinct and extant taxa and the cetacean–artiodactyl question (Mammalia, Ungulata). Cladistics, 15, 315–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2001). The phylogenetic position of cetaceans: further combined data analyses, comparisons with the stratigraphic record and a discussion of character optimization. American Zoologist, 41, 487–506.Google Scholar
and (2000). Independent contrasts succeed where ancestor reconstruction fails in a known bacteriophage phylogeny. Evolution, 54, 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1988a). The taxon-level problem in the evolution of mammalian brain size: facts and artifacts. American Naturalist, 132, 344–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1988b). How mammals produce large-brained offspring. Evolution, 42, 948–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1989). Taxonomic differences in the scaling of brain on body-weight among mammals. Science, 244, 1589–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1996). The skeleton of Gazinocyon vulpeculus Gen. et Comb. Nov. and the cladistic relationships of Hyaenodontidae (Eutheria, Mammalia). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 16, 303–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2001). Paleontology and the comparative method: ancestral node reconstructions versus observed node values. American Naturalist, 157, 596–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and (2006). Earliest known carnivoran auditory bulla and support for a recent origin of crown-group Carnivora (Eutheria, Mammalia). Palaeontology 49, 1019–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1973). Aegyptopithecus endocasts: oldest records of a pongid brain. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 39, 239–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1977b). Early primate brains: facts and fiction. Journal of Human Evolution, 6, 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1978). Evolution of brain size in carnivores and ungulates. American Naturalist, 112, 815–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). How does the inclusion of fossil data change our conclusions about the phylogenetic history of euphyllophytes?International Journal of Plant Sciences, 167, 737–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1990). Body mass and hindlimb bone cross-sectional and articular dimensions in anthropoid Primates. In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology, ed. and . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 119–50.Google Scholar
, and (2006). Combining molecular, morphological and ecological data to infer species boundaries in a cryptic tropical pitviper. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 87, 343–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2004). Molecular phylogeny of arctoids (Mammalia: Carnivora) with emphasis on phylogenetic and taxonomic positions of the ferret-badgers and skunks. Zoological Science, 21, 111–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2006). Evidence from nuclear DNA sequences sheds light on the phylogenetic relationships of Pinnipedia: single origin with affinity to Musteloidea. Zoological Science, 23, 125–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1984). Scaling: Why is Animal Size so Important?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 239 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2003). Phylogeny reconstruction: the role of morphology. Systematic Biology, 52, 539–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2008). Estimating body mass in New World ‘monkeys’ (Platyrrhini, Primates) from craniodental measurements, with a consideration of the Miocene platyrrhine, Chilecebus carrascoensis. American Museum Novitates, 3617, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1993). New endocasts of Aegyptopithecus: oldest well-preserved record of the brain in Anthropoidea. American Journal of Science, 293–A, 383–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1945). The principles of classification and a classification of mammals. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 85, 1–350.Google Scholar
(2007). The impact of postcranial characters on reconstructing the phylogeny of Carnivoramorpha. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 27(3 suppl.), 151A.Google Scholar
and (2009). Anatomy of the postcranial skeleton of ‘Miacis’ uintensis (Mammalia: Carnivoramorpha). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 29(4), 1212–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (in press). A new basal carnivoramorphan (Mammalia) from the ‘Bridger B’ (Bridger Formation, Bridgerian NALMA, Middle Eocene) of Wyoming. Palaeontology.
and (1987). Reconstructing ancestral character states under Wagner parsimony. Mathematical Biosciences, 87, 199–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1995). Phylogeny of the Caninae (Carnivora: Canidae): the living taxa. American Museum Novitates, 3146, 1–37.Google Scholar
(1989). Carnivore dental adaptations and diet: a study of trophic diversity within guilds. In Carnivore Behavior, Ecology, and Evolution, ed. . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 410–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1990). Skeletal and dental predictors of body mass in carnivores. In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology, ed. and . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 181–206.Google Scholar
(1991). Iterative evolution of hypercarnivory in canids (Mammalia, Carnivora) – evolutionary interactions among sympatric predators. Paleobiology, 17, 340–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2003). Pack hunting in Miocene borophagine dogs: evidence from craniodental morphology and body size. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 279, 147–62.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004). Cope's Rule, hypercarnivory, and extinction in North American canids. Science, 306, 101–04.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1995). La position systématique de Cryptoprocta ferox (Carnivora). Analyse cladistique des caractères morphologiques de carnivores Aeluroidea actuels et fossiles. Mammalia, 59, 551–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (2004). Molecular systematics and origin of sociality in mongooses (Herpestidae, Carnivora). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 30, 582–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996). European Miocene Amphicyonidae – taxonomy, systematics and ecology. Acta Zoologica Fennica, 204, 1–61.Google Scholar
, , and (1994). Higher level relationships of the arctoid Carnivora based on sequence data and total evidence. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 3, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1994). Phylogenetic systematics of the Hesperocyoninae (Carnivora: Canidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 221, 1–207.Google Scholar
and (1994). Basicranial anatomy and phylogeny of primitive canids and closely related miacids (Carnivora: Mammalia). American Museum Novitates, 3092, 1–34.Google Scholar
, and (1999). Phylogenetic systematics of the Borophaginae (Carnivora: Canidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 243, 1–391.Google Scholar
, , , , and (1997). Molecular systematics of the Canidae. Systematic Biology, 46, 622–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2002). Ancestral states and evolutionary rates of continuous characters. In Morphology, Shape and Phylogeny, ed. and . New York, NY: Taylor and Francis, pp. 247–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004). The life history legacy of evolutionary body size change in carnivores. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 17, 396–407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2005). Phylogeny of the Carnivora: basal relationships among the carnivoramorphans, and assessment of the position of ‘Miacoidea’ relative to crown-clade Carnivora. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, 3, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2005). Basicranial morphology and phylogenetic position of the upper Eocene carnivoramorphan Quercygale. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 50, 837–46.Google Scholar
and (1998). The phylogeny of the extant chelicerate orders. Cladistics, 14, 173–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1993). Phylogeny and classification of early European Mustelida (Mammalia: Carnivora). Acta Theriologica, 38, 345–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2001). Phylogenetic relationships within the eared seals (Otariidae: Carnivora): implications for the historical biogeography of the family. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 21(2), 270–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1987). The walrus auditory region and the monophyly of pinnipeds. American Museum Novitates, 2871, 1–31.Google Scholar
and (1993). A phylogenetic analysis and definition of the Carnivora. In Mammal Phylogeny: Placentals, ed. , , and . New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, pp. 32–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2003). Origin of Malagasy Carnivora. In The Natural History of Madagascar, ed. and . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1253–56.Google Scholar
, , , et al. (2003). Single origin of Malagasy Carnivora from an African ancestor. Nature, 421, 734–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , and (2007). Molecular phylogenetic study on the origin and evolution of Mustelidae. Gene, 396, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2006). Phylogeny of the caniform carnivora: evidence from multiple genes. Genetica, 127, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2004a). Phylogenetic relationships within mammalian Order Carnivora indicated by sequences of two nuclear DNA genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 33, 694–705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2004b). Phylogeny of the bears (Ursidae) based on nuclear and mitochondrial genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 32, 480–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
- 30
- Cited by