hominid classification

[John Grehan]

My comments on Ken's outline:

>   6  Pongidae%
>         1  Dryopithecus

Probably polyphyletic. Thick dental forms probably members of the
human-orangutan clade rather than Dryopithecus.

>         ?  Ouranopithecus
>         2  Lufengpithecus
>         B  Sivapithecus
>         C  Pongo

I predict all four belong or be closely related to the human-orangutan
clade (one set of authors even considered Ouranopithecus to be closely
related to Australopithecus, although the argument was quite weak).

>         3  Gorilla
>         ?  Samburupithecus
>         4  Pan
>         5  {{Hominidae}}
>  _a_ Hominidae
>         1  Ardipithecus

Yet to see cladistic justification of Ardipithecus as a hominid (even if it
were bipedal which remains to be seen)

>         ?  Sahelanthropus

No cladistic justification I am aware of that this is a hominid or even
more closely related to humans than either chimps or orangutans. (And the
there is other paleontological disagreement over the status of this taxon
outside those supporting the human-orangutan clade)

>         2  Australopithecus

I am not aware that this group has any synapomorphy

>        _a_ Homo

Apparently this group also still lacks synapomorphy


>      HOWEVER, if Hominidae is sister to Sivapithecus, I would just move
> the {{Hominidae}} and recode the pongids.  Family Pongidae has the same
> contents as before:

Please add in explanation of codes as I am confused as to what is being
included as Hominidae. In my proposal Sivapithecus would probably be a
member of Hominidae, not a sister group to it.

Even if the cladistic position of humans and orangutans ever becomes
accepted, the position of fossil forms will still require some serious and
detailed analysis (including the ability of different people to see
holotypes) to clear up groups that are more a presumption than well
substantiated taxa. The systematic fossil hominoid (and particularly
hominid) record appears to me to be a dreadful and embarrassing mess
through the widespread shoddy systematic and taxonomic practice (cripes I
expect to be buried for that)

John Grehan


>   1  Cercopithecidae
>   2  Propliopithecidae
>   3  Pliopithecidae
>   4  Proconsulidae
>   ?  Oreopithecidae
>   5  Hylobatidae
>   6  Pongidae%
>         1  Dryopithecus
>         ?  Ouranopithecus
>         2  Lufengpithecus
>         B  Pongo
>         C  Sivapithecus
>         D  {{Hominidae}}
>         3  Gorilla
>         ?  Samburupithecus
>         4  Pan
>  _a_ Hominidae
>         1  Ardipithecus
>         ?  Sahelanthropus
>         2  Australopithecus
>        _a_ Homo
>
>       And FINALLY, if Hominidae is sister to a Gorilla-Pan clade, a
> simple recoding also suffices (Family Pongidae continues to have the same
> contents).
>
>   1  Cercopithecidae
>   2  Propliopithecidae
>   3  Pliopithecidae
>   4  Proconsulidae
>   ?  Oreopithecidae
>   5  Hylobatidae
>   6  Pongidae%
>         1  Dryopithecus
>         ?  Ouranopithecus
>         2  Lufengpithecus
>         B  Sivapithecus
>         C  Pongo
>         3  {{Hominidae}}
>         4  Gorilla
>         ?  Samburupithecus
>         5  Pan
>  _a_ Hominidae
>         1  Ardipithecus
>         ?  Sahelanthropus
>         2  Australopithecus
>        _a_ Homo
>
>       And likewise, other topologies (such as Hominidae as sister to a
> Sivapithecus-Pongo clade or as sister to Pongo alone) would only require
> minor recoding.  Meanwhile, Family Pongidae has the same traditional
> contents no matter who turns out to be correct about the exact
> topology.  The result of this modular approach to classification means we
> can have our cake and eat it too:  stable taxon contents and a fluid
> topology that can change with new information.  I can see no advantage to
> erecting a Family Panidae, even if Gorilla and Pan do clade together (as
> in the second and third classifications above).  It's just as
> destabilizing as putting chimps into Family Hominidae, although not as
> bad as putting chimps into genus Homo (that proposal still makes me
> grimace like the sound of fingernails scraping down a blackboard).  The
> traditional Family Pongidae is not broken, so I wish people would quit
> trying to fix it.
>         ---- Ken Kinman