[Taxacom] Long-distance oceanic dispersal (rafting) of Nothofagus species

[JF Mate]

What I meant is that the topic, as far as I see it, is dead in Taxacom
(bar a few brave souls) since no fruitful debate is possible. The
discourse invariably hits the same snags:

One side claims that molecular data is glorified phenetics with no
contextual value if it contradicts a particular point of
view/hypothesis.
Dispersal is an unquantified, undefined amount that exists beyond the
equally fuzzy "ecological dispersal".
More fossils can always be found.

As for the field, what I see is that people have long moved on,
pursuing a hybrid model where the facts, always scarce and patchy, may
support one model or another, and where novel data may refute previous
hypotheses. In the end some things have moved (either due to luck or
ability) and others haven´t, but in the end every case should assume
that there is no de facto explanation.

Jason

On 4 June 2018 at 16:13, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jason,
>
> Not sure what you mean by 'the topic has been dead for years'. Do you mean
> that as far as you are concerned that there is no resolution of the
> different points of view and that for you the topic is dead - of no further
> interest to you? Certainly for biogeographers in general the topic is not
> dead since biogeography continues to involve active participation of many
> biologists. And over the last few years there have been some considerable
> clarity over the nature of shared biogeographic patterns and their
> geological correlation that are predictive (of other taxa), testable (in the
> sense of corroboration and also potentially future discoveries), and clear
> definitions that everyone can understand.
>
> The principal problem with Ken's assertion about the floating Nothofagus
> trees (with some upside down!) is that it is a scenario generated by
> imagination rather than some kind of analysis, and based on an assertion
> that the taxa involved evolved later than any geological separation, but
> this is totally without evidence, there being no fossil or calibrated
> molecular dates that preclude earlier origins. Same goes for his assertions
> about monkeys. The papers he cites simply do what Ken does, assert a belief
> system that monkeys rafted from one region to another, denying any
> possibility of earlier origin even though there is no actual evidence to do
> so. That is why I call such stories fairy tales. All science generates
> stories (even in physics). Stories are our models of explanation, but to
> have some integrity there must be a sequential connection to some evidence
> as it is the nature of evidence that can come under scrutiny and analysis
> and therefore be part of science. At least that is how I see it.
>
> John Grehan
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 6:57 AM, JF Mate <aphodiinaemate at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You can´t win this Ken, that is why the topic has been dead for years.
>> There is a clear problem with a lack of clear, predictive and testable
>> hypotheses and definitions, without which advance is impossible.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> On 3 June 2018 at 03:51, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >       The recent thread got me thinking about a debate that some of us
>> > were having on taxacom almost 12 years ago.  Namely whether long-distance
>> > oceanic dispersal (by rafting) was a significant factor in the geographic
>> > distribution of some species of Nothofagus (sensu lato).
>> >        My hypothesis was that large rafts of dislodged Nothofagus trees
>> > (due to tsunami or other massive flooding event) could have held some of
>> > their fruit above the ocean surface and rafted from Tasmania to New Zealand,
>> > where one or more  new species could evolve (due to founder effect).  This
>> > would be a relatively short rafting event compared to the much longer
>> > driftwood oceanic rafting that happened from South America to Tasmania:
>> > Barber, 1959, in the journal Nature; "Transport of Driftwood from South
>> > America to Tasmania". Is there other evidence that such dispersal of
>> > Nothofagus could have happened? Could certain insects, mosses, or other
>> > organisms have hitched a ride on such a Nothofagus raft?
>> >                                    --------------Ken Kinman
>> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2006-December/108385.html
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Taxacom Mailing List
>> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >
>> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
>> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >
>> > Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years,
>> > 1987-2018.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
>
>