[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
I used to lament...
...that there were no cladistic analyses of human relationships. Well,
fortunately I was wrong. Just for the record...
D. W. Cameron: Early hominin speciation at the Plio/Pleistocene transition,
HOMO 54/1, 1 -- 28 (2003)
72 craniofacial characters, unfortunately all unordered, even when they have
a state called "intermediate".
Strict consensus of all 8 MTPs:
+--*Gorilla*
`--+--*Pan troglodytes* (chimp)
|--*Pan paniscus* (bonobo)
`--+--*Ardipithecus*
|--*Australopithecus anamensis*
|--*A. anamensis*
|--*A. afarensis*
|--*A. garhi*
`--+--*A. africanus*
`--+--+--*Kenyanthropus rudolfensis*
| `--+--*K. platyops*
| `--+--*Paranthropus walkeri* (I thought *aethiopicus*)?
| `--+--*P. robustus*
| `--*P. boisei*
`--+--*Homo habilis*
`--+--*H. sapiens*
`--+--*H. ergaster*
`--*H. erectus*
In the 50 % majority-rule consensus of all trees within 2.5 % of the MPTs
( = up to 7 steps longer), the two *Kenyanthropus* species form a polytomy
with *Paranthropus* and *Homo*, the rest stays identical. Cameron favors the
introduction of the name *Praeanthropus* for *Ardipithecus* and all
*Australopithecus* species except the type (*A. africanus*).