Re: No Cretaceous placental mammals?

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> The new eutherian phylogeny, produced with the inclusion of _Maelestes 
> gobiensis_ of the Djadokhta, and using a considerable spread
> of Cretaceous eutherians and Paleogene mammals finds:
> * monophyletic Euarchontaglires, Laurasiatheria, Xenarthra, and Afrotheria 
> (the latter two as sister taxa, and together the sister
> taxon to laurasiatheres)

Wow! As soon as one takes a serious look at the morphological data, most of 
the molecular topology comes out! I'm impressed. :-)

> * the sister group to Placentalia is a clade comprised of _Purgatorius_, 
> _Protungulatum_, and _Oxyprimus_

Quite unexpected.

> * more distal outgroups are lepticids, zalambdalestids, _Deccanolestes_, a 
> Asioryctotheria + Cimolestida clade (the latter includes
> _Maelestes_), an _Eozhelestes_ + _Paranyctoides_ clade, zhelestids, 
> _Montanaletes_, _Bobolestes_, and an (_Eomaia_ +
> _Prokennalestes_)+ _Murtoilestes_ clade

So, judging from the epipubes retained by the zalambdalestids, the placental 
mode of reproduction is limited to Placentalia + 
*Purgatorius*-*Protungulatum*-*Oxyprimus* + Leptictidae?

Interesting position for the cimolestidans. That probably fits the fact 
better that some retain 5 premolars.