Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Most parsimonious areagrams versus fossils: the case of Nothofagus (Nothofagaceae)|
|Citation:||Australian Journal of Botany, 2001; 49(3):367-376|
|Publisher:||C S I R O Publishing|
|Ulf Swenson and Robert S. Hill|
|Abstract:||Vicariance biogeography uses most parsimonious areagrams in order to explain biogeographic patterns. One notion is that areagrams convey biogeographic information to the extent that alternative palaeogeographic hypotheses are suggested. However, extinctions may distort biogeographic information, leading to areagrams showing area relationships not supported by geological data, and plausible dispersal events might also be overlooked. By the use of the software COMPONENT 2.0, Nothofagus phylogeny was reconciled with the most parsimonious areagrams. Well-preserved fossils, identified to subgenera, were optimised to the reconciled tree. Not all past distributions were predicted by the analysis, and Nothofagus has clearly been present in areas where it cannot have been if strict vicariance is followed. It can therefore be demonstrated that the biogeographic signal in Nothofagus areagrams is incomplete, and that most parsimonious areagrams can be flawed. Areagrams can be a useful tool in historical biogeography, but must be scrutinised within a known geological context and not accepted uncritically as alternative palaeogeographical hypotheses.|
|Rights:||© CSIRO 2001|
|Appears in Collections:||Ecology, Evolution and Landscape Science publications|
Environment Institute Leaders publications
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.