Version 1
: Received: 5 September 2018 / Approved: 5 September 2018 / Online: 5 September 2018 (12:02:42 CEST)
How to cite:
Hershkovitz, M.A. Perspectives from Montiaceae (Portulacineae) Evolution. I. Phylogeny and Phylogeography. Preprints2018, 2018090096. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201809.0096.v1
Hershkovitz, M.A. Perspectives from Montiaceae (Portulacineae) Evolution. I. Phylogeny and Phylogeography. Preprints 2018, 2018090096. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201809.0096.v1
Hershkovitz, M.A. Perspectives from Montiaceae (Portulacineae) Evolution. I. Phylogeny and Phylogeography. Preprints2018, 2018090096. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201809.0096.v1
APA Style
Hershkovitz, M.A. (2018). Perspectives from Montiaceae (Portulacineae) Evolution. I. Phylogeny and Phylogeography. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201809.0096.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Hershkovitz, M.A. 2018 "Perspectives from Montiaceae (Portulacineae) Evolution. I. Phylogeny and Phylogeography" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201809.0096.v1
Abstract
Montiaceae comprise a clade of at least 270 species plus about 20 accepted subspecific taxa, primarily of western America and Australia. The present paper is the first of a two-part work that seeks to evaluate evolutionary theory via metadata analysis of Montiaceae. In particular, it uses metadata analysis to evaluate the theory in theory-laden methods that have been applied in evolutionary analyses of Montiaceae. This part focuses on phylogeny and phylogeography. The second part focuses on phenotypic and ecological diversification. An emergent theme in this paper is the degree to which historical idiosyncrasy during Montiaceae evolution misleads quantitative methods of evolutionary reconstruction and phylogeographic interpretation. This suggests that idiosyncraticity itself is a fundamental property of evolution. The second part of this work elaborates this notion as the Principle of Evolutionary Idiosyncraticity. The present part describes idiosyncraticity in molecular phylogenetic and phylogeographic data and uses this notion to refine ideas on Montiaceae evolution. Phylogenetic metadata conflicts and conflicting phylogeographic interpretations are discussed. I conclude that, owing to PEI, quantitative methods of evolutionary analysis cannot be globally accurate, though they are useful heuristically. In contrast, classical narrative analysis is robust in the face of PEI.
Keywords
Montiaceae; phylogeny; phylogeography; long-distance dispersal; idiosyncrasy; Principal of Evolutionary Idiosyncraticity
Subject
Biology and Life Sciences, Plant Sciences
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment:
I am on record for early advocacy of a "young" Portulacineae and consequent LDD explanation of all of its intercontinental disjunctions (H&Z 1997, 2000). Age estimates have increased with each subsequent analysis up to 2018, but still support LDD. That said, I would be ecstatic if I were wrong and Heads and others proved to be correct. That is why I love science. It is ALL about correcting mistakes, including one's own. Those afraid of correcting mistakes have no business in science. My late daddy, Philip Hershkovitz, published a ton (sole author!). He once told me that much of his later work was correcting mistakes in his earlier work. He loved it. He said that not only was he the only neotropical mammalogist knowledgeable enough to correct his mistakes, he was the only one knowledgeable enough to have made them in the first place!
I would be even MORE ecstatic if Biblical Creation proved to be correct. Dad did not write the Bible, of course. One of his great uncles did.
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment:
....of course, we will all learn the verdict on Creationism when the Rapture comes. The next predicted date is in 2019. But that individual has a poor prediction track record. Somebody at Yale, I think. After that, 2020 fide Jeanne Dixon. My money is on that one.
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/201808.0496/v1
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
I would be even MORE ecstatic if Biblical Creation proved to be correct. Dad did not write the Bible, of course. One of his great uncles did.
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
1. SAm Schreiteria – NAm Phemeranthus
2. NAm Phemeranthus – SAm Phemeranthus punae
3. SAm Cistanthe – NAm Cistanthe guadalupensis & C. maritima
4. SAm Philippiamra – NAm Calyptridium
5. SAm Montioideae – Aus Rumicastrum
6. SAm Calandrinia acaulis – NAm Calandrinia acaulis
7. SAm Calandrinia ciliata – NAm Calandrinia ciliata
8. SAm/NAm Calandrinia sect. Calandrinia – NAm Calandrinia menziesii
9. SAm Montioideae – Antarc Hectorelleae
10. NZ Hectorella - Kerg Lyallia
11. SAm Montioideae – NAm Montieae
12. NAm Montia – NZ/Aus Montia sect. Australiensis
13. NZ Montia sect. Australiensis – Aus Montia sect. Australiensis
14. NZ/Aus Montia sect. Australiensis – NAm Montia howellii (not anthro, contra O’Quinn)
15. NAm Montia sect. Montia – SAm Montia meridiensis (? = M. fontana subsp.)
16. NAm Montia fontana – Cosmo Montia fontana (pre-anthro)
17. US/SCan Lewisia pygmaea s. l. – NCan/AK Lewisia pygmaea s. l. (inadequate collecting?)
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.