[Taxacom] Hominoid classification (was: Incertae sedis)

[John Grehan]

As noted in the past, I have no objections to Ken expressing his opinion about his preferred classification, but in the absence of supporting evidence also being presented, the classification is scientifically meaningless.

Chororapithecus has nothing definitively gorilla, and contradictorily the molars have thick enamel!

I have not seen any evidence that Ouranopithecus and Nakalipithecus are closely related. I would be interested to know what Ken would cite in support that would place Ouranopithecus closer to Nakalipithecus than various other orangutan relatives as demonstrated by Grehan & Schwartz (2009).

More fossil material is not the solution in of itself. Early hominids (australopiths) for example, clearly have orangutan as well as human-orangutan apomorphies, but no one wants to recognize that reality.

A whole genome analysis isn't going to accomplish anything for fossil hominids of course.

John Grehan 

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Kenneth Kinman
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 11:06 PM
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: [Taxacom] Hominoid classification (was: Incertae sedis)

Dear All,
         I had a little extra time this evening, so I was looking at a
couple of other fossil hominoid genera named in recent years
(Nakalipithecus and Chororapithcus).  Based on them and various
interpretations of Ouranopithecus, I have concluded that all three of
these genera probably split off after the orangutan clade (i.e.,
Lufengpithecus, Sivapithecus, Khoratpithecus and Pongo).  I no longer
regard Ouranopithecus as incertae sedis next to the more basal
("primitive") Dryopithecus.                           
        Ouranopithecus and Nkalipithecus seem closely related, likely
splitting off before the gorilla-chimpanzee-hominid clade (but after the
orangutan clade)  Chororapithecus, on the other hand seems closer to
Gorilla, so I am placing it in the Gorilla-Pan-hominid polytomy.   Here
is how my classification looks with these additions and changes (NOTE: I
probably will not attempt to re-cladify the gorilla-chimp-hominid clade
until a much anticipated whole genome analysis is published):
 
   11 Pongidae% 
            1 Dryopithecus (sensu lato)
            2 Lufengpithecus
            B Sivapithecus
            C Khoratpithecus
            D Pongo 
            3 Ouranopithecus
            B Nakalipithecus 
           4A Gorilla
            A Chororapithecus 
            A Samburupithecus
            A Pan
            A Sahelanthropus
            A Orrorin
            A Ardipithecus
            A {{Hominidae}} 

    _a_ Hominidae 
            1 Australopithecus% (sensu lato)
          _a_ Homo 


P.S.  Polytomies, such as the whole gorilla-chimp-hominid clade above,
are sometimes not referred to as "incertae sedis", but with a more
precise term "sedis mutabilis".  So I guess the above classification
contains one large polytomy (including a number of genera which are
"sedis mutabilis"), but none of which are probably truly "incertae
sedis" (although some might disagree with that view).  Ouranopithecus
now seems less incertae sedis than it was previously, but some workers
would probably even put it in the gorilla-chimp-hominid polytomy.  So
this present placement is in between where they might place it and where
it was previously.  As always, more fossil material is clearly needed.

        --------------Ken Kinman


_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org

(2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here