z-logo
Premium
CLADISTIC REAPPRAISAL OF NEOTROPICAL STENODERMATINE BAT PHYLOGENY
Author(s) -
Lim Burton K.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
cladistics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.323
H-Index - 92
eISSN - 1096-0031
pISSN - 0748-3007
DOI - 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1993.tb00215.x
Subject(s) - synapomorphy , monophyly , biology , paraphyly , sister group , zoology , cladistics , clade , taxon , evolutionary biology , phylogenetics , ecology , biochemistry , gene
— Several phylogenies have been proposed for neotropical stenodermatine fruit‐eating bats (Phyllostomidae), based on detention, external morphology, osteology and chromosomes. However, these previous analyses did not incorporate fully the idea that relationships should be identified based solely on shared derived characteristics. A critique of past methodology and results, and an alternative phylogeny using a morphological data set supplemented with karyotypic information, is presented. In my analysis, there appear two main lineages. The eight genera of white‐shouldered bats form a monophyletic clade based on three synapomorphies (white patch of fur on shoulders, lack of a palatial extension with varying degrees of emargination and modified upper incisors); previous work suggested a paraphyletic relationship for this group. Furthermore, the monophyly of the four genera endemic to the Antilles is supported by two synapomorphies, suggesting a common origin as opposed to a multiple invasion for these genera. The appearance of the derived 2n = 30 and FN = 56 standard karyotype suggests that the morphologically distinct Sturnira forms the sister taxon to the remaining genera which are united by the synapomorphy of white facial stripes. This supports the inclusion of Sturnira within the stendodermatines and not in its own monotypic higher‐level taxon. My results do not refute the traditional systematic view of Artibeus (including Dermanura, Koopmania and Enchisthenes ) being monophyletic, and supports Mesophylla and Vampyressa being distinct non‐sister genera.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here