Phylogenetic Relationships and a Classification of the Eutherian Mammalia

  • Frederick S. Szalay
Part of the NATO Advanced Study Institutes Series book series (NSSB, volume 14)


It is remarkable that the enormous increase in the fossil evidence, new facts from the study of living mammals, and the promising rise of molecular studies have in fact had less than the usually declared effect in modifying a number of basic ideas on methods of phylogenetic inference which have been in practice since the beginning of this century. Similarly, one finds that many of the early (late 19th and early 20th century) hypotheses of relationships are being “rediscovered” or have remained unfalsified when evidence already known to these workers is rediscovered. Growth in the data base and the increasing number of students addressing themselves to phylogenetic problems nevertheless have resulted in an enormous increase in the literature and many very sound phylogenetic and morphological studies.


Late Cretaceous Phylogenetic Hypothesis Cheek Tooth Fossil Mammal Evolutionary Classification 
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. Archer, M., 1974, The development of the cheek-teeth in Antechinus flavipes (Marsupialia, Dasyuridae). J. Royal Soc. of Western Australia, 57:54–63.Google Scholar
  2. Bensley, B.A., 1903, A theory of the origin and evolution of the Australian Marsupialia. Amer. Naturalist, 25: 245–269.Google Scholar
  3. Broom, R., 1926, On the mammalian presphenoide and mesethmoid bones.Proc. Zool. Soc. London, pp. 257–264.Google Scholar
  4. Broom, R., 1927, Some further points on the structure of the mammalian basicranial axis. Prox. Zool. Soc. London, pp. 233–244. Broom, R., 1935, A further contribution to our knowledge on the struc-Google Scholar
  5. ture of the mammalian basicranial axis. Ann. Transvall Mus., 18: 33–36.Google Scholar
  6. Chow, M., 1975 (Artilce without English title). Wert. Palasiatica, 13: 154–162.Google Scholar
  7. Clemens, W.A., 1973, Fossil mammals of the type Lance Formation, Wyoming. Part I II. Eutheria and summary. Univ. Calif. Publ.Google Scholar
  8. Geol. Sci., 94:1–102.Google Scholar
  9. Eldredge, N. and Tattersall, I., 1975, Evolutionary models, phylogenetic reconstruction, and another look at hominid phylogeny, in “Approaches to primate paleobiology,” (F.S. Szalay, ed.), Contributions to Primatology, 5:218–242. S. Karger, Basel.Google Scholar
  10. Furry R.J., 1970, A North American Oligocene pangolin and other additions to the Pholidota.Bull.Amer.Mus.Nat.Hist., 142:459–510. Evans, R.S., 1942, The osteology and relationships of the elephantGoogle Scholar
  11. shrews (Macroscelididae. Bull.Amer.Mus.Nat.Hist., 80:85–125. Gingerich, P.D., 1976, Paleontology and phylogeny: patterns of evolution at the species level in early Tertiary mammals. Amer. J. Sci., 276: 1–28.Google Scholar
  12. Good, M., 1975, Protein sequence and immunological specificity: their role in phylogenetic studies of primates, in “Phylogeny of the primates: a multidisciplinary approach,” (W.P. Luckett and F.S. Szalay,), Plenum, New York and London, pp. 219–248.Google Scholar
  13. Gregory, W.K., 1910, The orders of mammals. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. 27.Google Scholar
  14. Gregory, W.K., 1951, Evolution emerging, a survey of changing patterns from primeval life to amn. Macmillan Co., N.Y., Vol. 1.Google Scholar
  15. Hecht, M.K. and Edwards, J., 1976, The determination of parallel or monophyletic relationships: The proteid salamanders-A test case. Amer. Natur., 110: 653–677.Google Scholar
  16. Helbing, H., 1938, Nachweis manisartiger Saugetiere im Stratifizierten europaischen Oligocaen. Eclog. Geol. Helvetiae, 31:296–303. Hennig, W., 1950, Grundzuge einer Theorie de phylogenetischen Systematik. Deutscher Zentralverlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  17. Hennig, W., 1965, Phylogenetic systematics. Ann. Rev. Entomol., 10: 97–115.Google Scholar
  18. Hennig, W., 1966, Phylogenetic systematics. Univ. Ill. Press, Chicago. Hoffstetter, R., 1972, Relationships, origins, and history of the ceboid monkeys and Caviomorph rodents: a modern reinterpretation. Evol. Biol., 6: 323–347.Google Scholar
  19. Jenkins, F.A., Jr., 1974, Tree shrew locomotion and the origins of primate arborealism, in “Primate locomotion,” (F.A. Jenkins, Jr., ed. ), Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kay, R.F. and Cartmill, M., 1974, Skull of Palaechthon nacimienti. Nature, 252: 37–38.Google Scholar
  21. Kielan-Jaworowska, Z., 1975, Results of the Polish-Mongolian palaeontological expeditions. Part VI. Preliminary description of two new eutherian genera from the late Cretaceous of Mongolia. Palaeont. Polonica, 33: 5–16.Google Scholar
  22. Kindahl, M.E., 1957, On the development of the tooth in Tupaia javanica. Ark. Zool., 10: 463–479.Google Scholar
  23. Kindahl, M.E., 1958a, Notes on the tooth development in Talpa europaea. Ark. Zool., 11: 187–191.Google Scholar
  24. Kindahl, M.E., 1958b, On the tooth development in Soricidee. Acta Odont. Scand., 17: 203–237.Google Scholar
  25. Kindahl, M.E., 1967, Some comparative aspects of the reduction of premolars in Insectivora. J. Dent. Res., 46: 805–808.Google Scholar
  26. Lillegraven, J.A., 1969, Latest Cretaceous mammals of upper part of Edmonton Formation of Alberta, Canada, and review of marsupial-placental dichotomy in mammalina evolution. Univ. Kansas Paleont. Contrib., article 50 (vertebrata 12).Google Scholar
  27. Luckett, W.P., 1975, Ontogeny of the fetal membranes and placenta: their bearing on primate phylogeny, in “Phylogeny of the primates: a multidisciplinary approach,” (W.P. Luckett and F.S. Szalay,), Plenum, N.Y. and London, pp. 157–182.Google Scholar
  28. Matthew, W.D., 1909, The Carnivora and Insectivora of the Bridger Basin, middle Eocene. Mem. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 9: 291–567.Google Scholar
  29. Matthew, W.D., 1937, Paleocene faunas of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico. Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc., 30: 1–510.Google Scholar
  30. Mayr, E., 1974, Cladistic analysis or cladistic classification. Z. Zool. Syst. Evol.-forsch., 12: 95–128.Google Scholar
  31. McDowell, S.B., 1958, The Greater Antillean insectivores. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 115: 115–214.Google Scholar
  32. McKenna, M.C., 1961, A note on the origin of rodents. Amer. Mus. Nov., no. 2037: 1–5.Google Scholar
  33. McKenna, M.C., 1969, The origin and early differentiation of therian mammals Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 167: 217–240.Google Scholar
  34. McKenna, M.C., 1975, Toward a phylogenetic classification of the Mammalia, in “Phylogeny of the primates: a multidisciplinary approach,” (W.P. Luckett and F.S. Szalay,), Plenum, N.Y. and London, pp. 21–46.Google Scholar
  35. McKenna, M.C., 1976, Esthonyx in the upper faunal assemblage, Huerfano Formation, Eocene of Colorado. Jour. Paleont. 50(2):354–355.Google Scholar
  36. Mossman, H.W.,1937, Comparative morphogenesis of the fetal membranes and accessory uterine structures. Contr. Embryol., 26: 129–246.Google Scholar
  37. Nelson, G., 1973, Classification as an expression of phylogenetic relationships. Syst. Zool., 22: 344–359.Google Scholar
  38. Popper, K.R., 1959, The logic of scientific discovery. Basic Books, N.Y.Google Scholar
  39. Rose, K.R., 1975, Elpidophorus the earliest dermopteran ( Dermoptera, Plagiomenidae). J. Mamm, 56: 676–679.Google Scholar
  40. Schlosser, M., 1887–1890, Die Affen, Lemuren, Chiropteren, Marsupialier, Creodonten und Carnivoren des europaischen Tertiars. Beitr. zur Palaont. Oestereich-Ungarns, pt. 1, 6:1–224; pt. 2, 7:1–162, pt. 3, 8: 1–106.Google Scholar
  41. Schwartz, J.H., 1975, Re-evaluation of the morphocline of molarGoogle Scholar
  42. appearance in the primates. Folia primat., 23:290–307. Simpson, G.G., 1931, Metacheiromys and the Edentata. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 59: 295–381.Google Scholar
  43. Simpson, G.G., 1937, The Fort Union of the Crazy Mountain Field, Montana, and its mammalian faunas. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull., 169: 1–287.Google Scholar
  44. Simpson, G.G., 1945, The principles of classification and a classification of mammals. Bull. Amer. Must. Nat. Hist., 85: 1–350.Google Scholar
  45. Simpson, G.G., 1975, Recent advances in methods of phylogenetic inference, in “Phylogeny of the primates: a multidisciplinaryGoogle Scholar
  46. approach,“ (W.P. Luckett and F.S. Szalay,), Plenum, N.Y. and London, pp. 3–19.Google Scholar
  47. Sloan, R.E. and Van Valen, L., 1965, Cretaceous mammals from Montana. Science, 148: 220–227.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sokal, R.R., 1975, Mayr on Cladism - and his critics. Syst. Zool., 24: 257–262.Google Scholar
  49. Stehlin, H.G., 1912–1916, Die Saugetiere des schweizerischen Eocaens. Critischer Catalog der Materialen. Abh. Schweiz. Pal. Ges., 38 and 41: 1165–1152.Google Scholar
  50. Szalay, F.S., 1968, The beginnings of primates. Evolution, 22: 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Szalay, F.S., 1975a, Early primates as a source for the taxon Dermoptera (Abs.). Amer. J. Phys. Anthro., 42 (2): 332–333.Google Scholar
  52. Szalay, F.S., 1975b, Phylogeny of primate higher taxa: the basicranial evidence, in “Phylogeny of the primates: a multidisciplinary approach,” (W.P. Luckett and F.S. Szalay,), Plenum, N.Y. and London, pp. 91–125.Google Scholar
  53. Szalay, F.S. and Decker, R.L., 1974, Origins, evolution and function of the pes in the Eocene Adapidae (Lemuriformes, Primates), in “Primate locomotion,” (F.A. Jenkins, Jr., ed. ), Academic Press, N.Y., pp. 239–259.Google Scholar
  54. Szalay, F.S. and McKenna, M.C., 1971, Beginnings of the age of mammals in Asia. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 144: 269–318.Google Scholar
  55. Szalay, F.S., Tattersall, I., and Decker, R.L., 1975, Phylogenetic relationships of Plesiadapis - postcranial evidence, in “Approaches to Primate Paleobiology, Contributions to Primatology,” (F.S. Szalay, ed.), Karger, Basel, Vol. 5, pp. 136–166.Google Scholar
  56. van Kampen, P.N., 1905, Die Tympanalgegend des Saugetierschadels. Morphol. Jahrbuch, 34: 321–722.Google Scholar
  57. Van Valen, L., 1966, Deltatheridia: a new order of mammals. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 132: 1–126.Google Scholar
  58. Van Valen, L., 1967, New Paleocene insectivores and insectivoreGoogle Scholar
  59. classification. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 135:217–284. Van Valen, L., 1971, Adaptive zones and the orders of mammalsGoogle Scholar
  60. Evolution, 25:420–428.Google Scholar
  61. Weber, M., 1904, Die Saugetiere. Einfuhrung in die Anatomie und Systematik der recenten und fossilen Mammalia. Gustav Fischer, Jena.Google Scholar
  62. Wiley, E.O., 1975, Karl R. Popper, systematics, and classification: a reply to Walter Bock and other evolutionary taxonomists. Syst. Zool., 24: 233–243.Google Scholar
  63. Winge, H., 1941, The interrelationships of the mammalian genera translated from Danish by E. Deichman and G.M. Allen. Kobenhavn C.A. Reitzels forlag., pp. 1–412.Google Scholar
  64. Wood, A.E., 1962, The early Tertiary rodents of the family Paramyidae. Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., n.s., 52: 1–261.Google Scholar
  65. Ziegler, A.C., 1971, A theory of the evolution of therian dental formulas and replacement patterns. Quart. Rev. Bio., 46: 226–249.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frederick S. Szalay
    • 1
  1. 1.Hunter CollegeCity University of New YorkNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations