Recent Advances in Methods of Phylogenetic Inference

  • George Gaylord Simpson


It would be possible to form an impression that zoologists are not currently much interested in the phylogeny of mammals. For example among 111 papers scheduled for presentation at the 1973 meeting of the American Society of Mammalogists, none were directly phylogenetic and only 9 (8%) dealt with systematics. Among 100 recent papers sampled at random in the journals Systematic Zoology and Evolution, 9 were on mammalian systematics in a rather narrow sense, but of these only 4 involved phylogeny. Nevertheless, the existence of the present conference and examination of a broader spectrum of the scattered literature do show that an interest in phylogeny does exist and that indeed this is now quite an active field of study and debate.


Fossil Record Phylogenetic Inference Fossil Evidence Continental Drift Phylogenetic Systematic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adanson, M. 1763. Familles des plantes. Vincent, Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adler, N. T. 1974. Essays in ethology. Science183:191–192.Google Scholar
  3. Andrews, D. F. 1972. Plots of high-dimensional data. Biometrics28:125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barlow, N., ed. 1958. The Autobiography of Charles Darwin. 1809–1882. Collins, London.Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, S. C., L. H. Throckmorton, and J. L. Hubby. 1973. Still more genetic variability in natural populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.70:3928–3931.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackwelder, R. E. 1967. Taxonomy, A Text and Reference Book. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Bock, W.J. 1968. Phylogenetic systematics, cladistics, and evolution. Evolution22:646–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyden, A. 1947. Homology and analogy, a critical review of the meanings and implications of these concepts in biology. Am. Midl. Nat.37:648–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyden, A. 1973. Perspectives in Biology. Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Boyle, A.J. 1964. The value of some methods of numerical taxonomy with reference to hominoid classification. In V. H. Heywood and J. McNeill ed. Phenetic and Phylogenetic Classification. Systematics Association, London.Google Scholar
  11. Brundin, L. 1966. Transantarctic relationships and their significance, as evidenced by chironomid midges with a monograph of the subfamilies. Podonominae and Aphroteniinae and the austral Heptagyinae. K. Sven. Vetensk. apsakad. Handl., Ser. 4, 11(1): 1–472.Google Scholar
  12. Bryson, V., and H. J. Vogel ed. 1965. Evolving Genes and Proteins. Academic Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
  13. Camin, J. H., and R. R. Sokal. 1965. A method for producing branching sequences in phylogeny. Evolution19:311–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell, B. 1974. Human Evolution. An Introduction to Man s Adaptations. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, W. E. Le Gros, and P. B. Medawar, ed. 1945. Essays on Growth and Form Presented to D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Cox, C. B., I. N. Healey, and P. D. Moore. 1973. Biogeography. An Ecological and Evolutionary Approach. Halsted (Wiley), New York.Google Scholar
  17. Crow, J. F. 1972. Darwinian and non-Darwinian evolution. In L. M. Le Cam, J. Neyman, and E. L. Scott, eds. Darwinian, Neo-Darwinian, and Non-Darwinian Evolution, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  18. Darlington, P. J., Jr. 1970. A practical criticism of Hennig-Brundin “phylogenetic systematics” and Antarctic biogeography. Syst. Zool.19:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Murray, London.Google Scholar
  20. Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. Murray, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Darwin, C. 1872. The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. Murray, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dayhoff, M. O. 1969. Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, Vol. 4. National Biochemical Research Foundation, Silver Spring, Maryland.Google Scholar
  23. DeVore, I., ed. 1965. Primate Behavior. Field Studies of Monkeys and Apes. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
  24. Dickerson, R. E. 1972. The structure and history of an ancient protein. Sci. Am.226(4): 58–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Edwards, A. W. F., and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza. 1964. Reconstruction of evolutionary trees. In V. H. Heywood and J. McNeill, eds., Phenetic and Phylogenetic Classification, Systematics Association, London.Google Scholar
  26. Farris, J. S. 1973. On the use of the parsimony criterion for inferring evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool.22:250–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Felsenstein, J. 1973. Maximum likelihood and minimum-steps methods for estimating evolutionary trees from data on discrete characters. Syst. Zool.22:240–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ghiselin, M. T. 1969. The Triumph of the Darwinian Method. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  29. Goodman, M. 1963. Man’s place in the phylogeny of the Primates as reflected in serum proteins. In S. L. Washburn, ed. Classification and Human Evolution, Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
  30. Haas, O., and G. G. Simpson. 1946. Analysis of some phylogenetic terms, with attempts at redefinition. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc.90:319–349.Google Scholar
  31. Hennig, W. 1950. Grundzüge einer Theorie der Phylogenetischen Systematik. Deutscher Zentralverlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  32. Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Systematics. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  33. Hoffstetter, R. 1972. Relationships, origins, and history of the ceboid monkeys and caviomorph rodents: a modern reinterpretation. Evol. Biol.6:323–347.Google Scholar
  34. Hoyer, B. H., B. J. McCarthy, and E. T. Bolton. 1964. A molecular approach in the systematics of higher organisms. Science1944:959–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hull, D. L. 1965. The effect of essentialism on taxonomy. Br. J. Phil. Sci.15:314–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hull, D. L. 1965. The effect of essentialism on taxonomy. Br. J. Phil. Sci.16:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hull, D. L. 1970. Contemporary systematic philosophies. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.1:19–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hull, D. L., ed. 1973. Contemporary systematic philosophies. Syst. Zool.22:337–400. (A symposium by five authors, with discussion by others.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jukes, T. H. 1972. Comparison of polypeptide sequences. In L. M. Le Cam, J. Neyman, and E. L. Scott, eds., Darwinian, Neo-Darwinian, and Non-Darwinian Evolution, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  40. Jukes, T. H., and R. Holmquist. 1972. Evolutionary clock: non-constancy of rate in different species. Science177:530–532.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. King, J. L., and T. H. Jukes. 1969. Non-Darwinian evolution. Science164:788–798.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kluge, A. G., and J. S. Farris. 1969. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool.18:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kohne, D. E., J. A. Chiscon, and B. H. Hoyer. 1972. Evolution of mammalian DNA. In L. M. Le Cam, J. Neyman, and E. L. Scott, eds., Darwinian, Neo-Darwinian, and Non-Darwinian Evolution. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  44. Le Cam, L. M., J. Neyman, and E. L. Scott, eds. 1972. Proceedings of the sixth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, Vol. 5. Darwinian, Neo-Darwinian, and Non-Darwinian Evolution. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  45. Leone, C. A., ed. 1964. Taxonomic Biochemistry and Serology. Ronald Press, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Lewontin, R. C. 1974. The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Margoliash, E. 1969. Homology: a definition. Science163:127.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Margoliash, E., and W. M. Fitch. 1968. Evolutionary variability of cytochrome c primary structures. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.151:359–381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mayr, E. 1958. Behavior and systematics. In A. Roe and G. G. Simpson, eds., Behavior and Evolution, Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  50. Mayr, E. 1969. Principles of Systematic Zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Oxnard, C. E. 1973. Functional inferences for morphometries: Problems posed by uniqueness and diversity among primates. Syst. Zool.22:409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pilbeam, D. 1972. Adaptive response of hominids to their environment as ascertained by fossil evidence. Soc. Biol.19:115–127.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Raup, D. M., and S. M. Stanley. 1971. Principles of Paleontology. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  54. Richmond, R. C. 1970. Non-Darwinian evolution: a critique. Nature225:1025–1028.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Roe, A., and G. G. Simpson, eds. 1958. Behavior and Evolution. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  56. Sarich, V. M. 1971. A molecular approach to the question of human origins. In P. Dolhinow and V. M. Sarich, eds., Background for Man, Little, Brown, Boston.Google Scholar
  57. Sarich, V. M., and A. C. Wilson. 1966. Quantitative immunochemistry and the evolution of primate albumins: Micro-complement fixation. Science154:1563–1566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sarich, V. M., and A. C. Wilson. 1967. Immunological time scale for hominid evolution. Science158:1200–1203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schaeffer, B., M. K. Hecht, and N. Eldredge, 1972. Phylogeny and paleontology. Evol. Biol6:31–46.Google Scholar
  60. Simpson, G. G. 1961. Principles of Animal Taxonomy. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  61. Sokal, R. R., and P. H. A. Sneath. 1963. Principles of Numerical Taxonomy. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco and London. (A revised edition, 1973, relaxes much of the dogmatism but retains the premises of the original statement.)Google Scholar
  62. Thompson, D’Arcy W. 1917. On Growth and Form. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. (Revised edition, 1942.)Google Scholar
  63. Wahlert, J. H. 1968. Variability of rodent incisor enamel as viewed in thin section and the microstructure of the enamel in fossil and recent rodent groups. Breviora Mus. Comp. Zool.309:1–18.Google Scholar
  64. Wasserman, E., and L. Levine. 1960. Quantitative micro-complement fixation and its use in the study of antigenic structure by specific antigen-antibody fixation. J. Immunol.87:290–295.Google Scholar
  65. Whyte, L. L., ed. 1968. Aspects of Form. American Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
  66. Williams, C. A., Jr. 1964. Immunochemical analysis of serum proteins of the primates. In J. Buettner-Janusch, ed., Evolutionary and Genetic Biology of the Primates, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  67. Zuckerkandl, E. 1963. Perspectives in molecular anthropology. In S. L. Washburn, ed., Classification and Human Evolution, Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
  68. Zuckerman, S., ed. 1950. A Discussion on the Measurement of Growth and Form. Royal Society, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Gaylord Simpson
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Arizona and the Simroe FoundationTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations