Problems with hominid fossil species taxa and the construction of taxograms

Frederick S. Szalay

Resumen


A variety of topics which play important roles in the systematics of fossil hominids are discussed. One of the major ontological/theoretical issues that influence the empirical work of species level taxonomy concerns the assumption that fossil hominid samples can be axiomatically considered terminal taxa. Another axiomatized practice is that of employing operational taxonomic units (OTUs) whereby nearly all samples of any level of distinction are considered valid species taxa. These unsubstantiated assumptions, coupled with punctuationist notions of species origin, intertwine to form a practice which results in a taxonomic distortion of what the probable evolutionary realities of evolving lineages were. The selection of extant taxonomic model species for delineating hominid species taxa has been a major issue of contention, and it will continue as long as observed ranges that include all known populations of any one single living hominoid model species continue to be ignored. Paleontological species taxa do not necessarily represent new lineages, but the iconography of taxograms (based on the practices noted) which routinely assume the latter to be phylogenetic trees imply a multitude of closed lineages. Such imagery is probably much more of an artifact than a tested reality of hominid evolutionary history. Examples are discussed.

 

Key words: Taxonomic assumptions, phylogenetics, punctuationism, species taxa, lineages, paleoanthropology, stage vs. grade.

 


Texto completo:

PDF

Referencias


Albrecht, G. H. and Miller, J. M. A. (1993, “Geographic variation in primates: A review with implications for interpreting fossils,” in Kimbel W. H., and L. B. Martin (eds.), Species, Species Concepts, and Primate Evolution. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 123-161.

Bock, W. J. (in press), “Towards a new metaphysics: the need for an enlarged philosophy of science,” Biology and Philosophy.

Bromage, T. G. and Schrenk, F. (1999), African Biogeography, Climate Change, and Human Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cartmill, M. (1994), “A critique of homology as a morphological concept,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 94: 115-123.

Cartmill, M. (1999), “Revolution, evolution, and Kuhn: a response to Chamberlain and Hartwig,” Evolutionary Anthropology 8(2): 45-47.

Collard, M. and Wood, B. (1999), “Grades among the African early hominids,” in Bromage, T. G. and F. Schrenk (eds.), African Biogeography, Climate Change, and Human Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 316-327.

Eldredge, N. and Cracraft, J. (1980), Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.

Gee, H. (1999), In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life. New York: The Free Press.

Ghiselin, M. T. (1997), Metaphysics and the Origin of Species. Albany: State Uni. New York Press.

Grubb, P. (1999), “Evolutionary processes implicit in the distribution patterns of modern African mammals,” in Bromage, T. G. and F. Schrenk (eds.), African Biogeography, Climate Change, and Human Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 150-164.

Howell, F. C. (1996), ”Thoughts on the study and interpretation of the human fossil record,” in Meikle, W. E., F. C. Howell and N. G. Jablonsky (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Human Evolution. California Academy of Sciences, Memoir 21, pp. 1-45.

Jolly, C. F. (1993), “Species, subspecies, and baboon systematics,” in Kimbel W. H., and L. B. Martin (eds.), Species, Species Concepts, and Primate Evolution. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 67-107.

Mayr, E., and Ashlock. (1991), Principles of Systematic Zoology, 2 ed. NY: McGraw. Mahner, M. and Bunge, M. (1997). Foundations of Biophilosophy. New York: Springer–Verlag.

Miller, J. M. A. (2000), ”Craniofacial variation in Homo habilis: an analysis of the evidence for multiple species,”Am. Journal of Phys. Anth. 112: 103-128.

Norell, M. A. (1996), Ghost taxa, ancestors, and assumptions: a comment on Wagner. Paleobiology, 22(3): 453-455.

Polly, P. D. (1997), “Ancestry and species definition in paleontology: a stratocladistic analysis of Paleocene-Eocene Viverravidae (Mammalia, Carnivora) from Wyoming,” Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, the University of Michigan 30(1): 1-53.

Polly, P. D. (1998), “Variability in mammalian dentitions: size–related bias in the coefficient of variation,” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 64: 83-99.

Raff, R. A. (1996), The Shape of Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Redline, A. D. (1997), Revision of the Wind River Faunas, early Eocene of central Wyoming. Part 13. Systematics and phylogenetic pattern of early Eocene Hyopsodus (Mammalia: Condylarthra). Annals of Carnegie Museum 66: 1-81.

Robinson, J. T. (1956), “The dentition of the Australopithecinae”. Transvaal Museum Memoirs 9: 1-179.

Rose, K. D. and Bown, T. (1993), Species concepts and species recognition in Eocene primates. In Kimbel W. H., and L. B. Martin (eds.), Species, Species Concepts, and Primate Evolution. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 299-330.

Schuh, R. T. (2000), Biological Systematics–Principles and Applications. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

Simpson, G. G. (1949), The Meaning of Evolution. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Simpson, G. G. (1963), “The meaning of taxonomic statements,” in Washburn, S. L. (ed.), Classification and Human Evolution. Chicago: Aldine, pp. 1-31.

Szalay, F. S. (1975), “Hunting-scavenging protohominids: a model for hominid origins,” Man 10: 420-429.

Szalay, F. S. (1993), “Species concepts: The tested, the untestable, and the redundant,” in Kimbel W. H., and L. B. Martin (eds.), Species, Species Concepts, and Primate Evolution. New York: Plenum Press, pp.21-41.

Szalay, F. S. (1994), Evolutionary History of the Marsupials and an Analysis of Osteological Characters. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Szalay, F. S. (1999), “Paleontology and macroevolution: On the theoretical conflict between an expanded Synthesis and hierarchic Punctuationism,” in Bromage, T. G. and F. Schrenk (eds.), African Biogeography, Climate Change, and Human Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 35-56.

Szalay, F. S. (2000), “Function and adaptation in paleontology and phylogenetics: why do we omit Darwin?” Paleontologia Electronica 3(2) 25p, 366 KB; http://palaeo-electronica.org/pleo/2000-2/darwin/issue2-00.htm

Szalay, F. S. and Bock, W. J. (1991), “Evolutionary theory and systematics: Relationships between process and patterns,” Zeitschrift Zoologische Systematic und Evolutions–Forschung 29: 1-39.

Szalay, F. S. and Costello, R. K. (1991), “Evolution of permanent estrus displays in hominids,” Journal of Human Evolution 20: 439-464.

Szalay, F. S. and Schrenk, F. (1998), “The middle Eocene Eurotamandua and a Darwinian phylogenetic analysis of “edentates,” Kaupia-Darmstädter Beiträge zur Naturgesichte 7: 97-186.

Szalay, F. S. and Sargis, E. J. (2001), “Model-based analysis of postcranial osteology of marsupials from the Paleocene of Itaboraí (Brazil) and the phylogenetics and biogeography of Metatheria,” Geodiversitas 23 (2): 1-166.

Tattersall, I. (2000), “Paleoanthropology: the last half-century,” Evolutionary Anthropology 4(1): 2-16.

White, T. D. (2000), “A view on the science: Physical Anthropology at the Millenium,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 113: 287-292.

Wood, B. (1993), “Early Homo: How many species?” in Kimbel W. H., and L. B. Martin (eds.), Species, Species Concepts, and Primate Evolution. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 485-522.


Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.


Revista semestral editada por el Centro de Estudios Filosóficos, Políticos
y Sociales Vicente Lombardo Toledano de la Secretaría de Educación Pública,
la Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Iztapalapa y Edicions UIB de la Universitat de les Illes Balears.

Lombardo Toledano 51, Col. Ex-Hda. Guadalupe Chimalistac,
Del. Alvaro Obregón, C.P. 01050, México, D.F.
Tels. (5255) 5661-4679 y 5661-4987
Fax: (5255) 5661-1787