Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:59:08.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Radical Look at Fish-Tetrapod Relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Keith Stewart Thomson*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520

Extract

No one needs reminding that we are well into a revolutionary phase in the study of evolution, systematics, and the interrelationships of organisms. To belabor the metaphor a little, to the thesis of Darwinian evolution and Mayrian systematics has been added a new cladistic antithesis which says that the search for ancestors is a fool's errand, that all we can do is determine sister group relationships of monophyletic taxa based on the analysis of derived characters. Consequently, our attention should be focused upon patterns which can be delineated, discussed, and modified in the light of new data, rather than upon processes which may only be the subject of untestable hypotheses. It is a change in approach that is not easy to accept for, in a sense, it runs counter to what we have all been taught, and it is particularly difficult for the paleontologist to accept because a major feature of the approach is a concentration upon living rather than on fossil forms. In fact, fossils are, in general, either difficult to use or irrelevant, or both, in terms of new attempts to set out the relationships of the major groups of organisms. The subject of this brief notice is a critically important new addition to the literature on this growing, dare I say evolving, subject.

Type
Current Happenings
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Allis, E. P. Jr. 1932. The pre-oral gut, the buccal cavity and the buccopharyngeal opening in Ceratodus. J. Anat. 66:650658.Google ScholarPubMed
Cope, E. D. 1892. On the phylogeny of the Vertebrata. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 30:278281.Google Scholar
Dollo, L. 1896. Sur la phylogenie des dipneustes. Bull. Soc. Beige Geol. Paleont. Hydrol. 9:79128.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E. 1942. On the structure of the snout of crossopterygians and lower gnathostomes in general. Zool. Bidrag fran Uppsala 21:235675.Google Scholar
Miles, R. S. 1977. Dipnoan (lungfish) skulls and the relationships of the group: A study based on new species from the Devonian of Australia. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 61:1328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, D. E., Forey, P. L., Gardiner, B. G., and Patterson, C. 1981. Lungfishes, tetrapods, paleontology, and plesiomorphy. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 167:163275.Google Scholar