[Taxacom] Correction on frog phylogeny

[Ken Kinman]

Dear All,
     I wasn't previously all that interested in frog taxonomy, but I 
obviously am now.  In studying the classification of Frost et al., 2006, it 
seems that the pendulum has recently swung back again toward the view that 
Ascaphus and Leiopelma do clade together.  There is apparently morphological 
and molecular data which support this view as well as the contrasting view 
that Leiopelma instead clades with the higher frogs.  So that controversy 
continues, and I am not sure which side will win out.

     I see that there are a lot of very interesting papers analyzing the 
biogeography of frogs, and vicariance has certainly played a major role in 
their evolution and distribution.  However, I think Leiopelmatidae may well 
provide a glaring exception, so I will be concentrating on that family 
(whether it clades with Ascaphidae or not).  Anyway, if any Australian 
paleoherpetologists are looking out for early Cenozoic sphenodontids (as I 
suggested), they might also be on the lookout for early Cenozoic 
leiopelmatids as well.  And I will stick out my neck once again and predict 
that early Cenozoic leiopelmatids will not be found in New Zealand.  Time 
will tell.
   ----Cheers,
           Ken Kinman

_________________________________________________________________
Get FREE Web site and company branded e-mail from Microsoft Office Live 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/