kuento@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (03/31/91)
Behavior as a Cladistic Character I have been spending a good deal of time giving thought to the above problem. Exactly how useful is behavior in cladistics? Ernst Mayr has spent a good deal of time waxing positive about the utility of behavior (as well as morphology, physiology, etc.) in the production of phylogenies, so as a result I assume that behavior is/has been a valid character for those who subscribe to evolutionary taxonomy. Numerical pheneticists have dismissed it, relying exclusively upon morphology, as have cladists. But, in light of all of the (perpetual) self-analysis occuring in theoretical cladistics, I think that behavior has been given short shrift in cladistics. Possible problems I've been able to come up with: 1) How far should you atomize the character, or, what exactly is the base node of a behavior? 2) What is a character? Should it be something that is completely novel for that state or should we use context-dependent characters? 3) Since apomorphic characters are the base of cladistics, how can we tell homologies from analogies? Are there others that I haven't been able to think of? Also if you want to suggest any good references concerning behavior in cladistics, please do so. Thanks Jim D-B -- ------(please include "JDB" in subj header of mail to this user)------ Jim Danoff-Burg (Snow Museum, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045) Bitnet: KUENTO@UKANVAX "Myrmecophiles-R-Us"