[Taxacom] Panbiogeography

[Michael Heads]

Hi Ken,

I didn't mean to imply that there was a debate about this group. Murphy &
Collier (1997) accepted vicariance, but I don't know if there have been any
responses to this from dispersalists.

Michael


On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Ken Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
>          I don't know much about the debate concerning killifish
> biogeography, but assume (since you brought it up) that it must still be
> controversial (as with the cichlid fishes we discussed previously).  I can
> certainly see how the killifishes could be one of the few taxa which
> survived on Madagascar during the K-T extinction which killed off so many
> other vertebrates there.  Especially since some killifish can enter
> diapause during periods of drought and/or starvation.
>
>         Are you asking my opinion whether I side in this particular case
> with the dispersalists or those advocating vicariance?  If so, I would have
> to look at the dispersalist arguments on the other side of the debate.  Are
> there any recent papers still suggesting dispersal played a major role in
> the broad (worldwide) biogeography of killifish?   Sounds like an
> interesting debate.
>
>                            --------------------------Ken
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:39:23 +1300
> > From: m.j.heads at gmail.com
>
> > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Panbiogeography
> >
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > The aplocheiloid killifish illustrate a standard pattern, with two main
> > clades (Fig. 2-3 in my 2012 book). One is in America, and (another
> > subclade) mainland Africa. It's not in Madagascar, and you might
> > assume that this was the result of extinction there. But the other main
> > clade is in Madagascar and the Seychelles, and also (another
> > subclade) from India to Java.
> >
> > You could explain the pattern by chance dispersal from anywhere within
> the
> > whole range, e.g. Guatemala or Gabon or Goa. Chance dispersal is not
> > related to any other factor, and so this wouldn't make any particular
> > predictions.
> >
> > As an alternative, both groups could have been everywhere to begin with,
> > and you could explain the pattern by the chance extinction of the first
> > group from Madagascar - Java, and the chance extinction of the second
> group
> > from America and Africa. This would predict fossils in the area of
> absence,
> > but none have ever been found. It's also difficult to imagine why one
> group
> > would go extinct in an area that is exactly allopatric with the area
> where
> > the other group went extinct. This explanation also leaves the original
> > differentiation of the groups unaccounted for.
> >
> > Or you could explain the pattern by simple vicariance, with the first
> break
> > located between Africa and Madagascar, at the Mozambique Channel. This
> > would make the general predictions that other groups would show similar
> > patterns, and that there would be a simple correlation between the
> pattern
> > and tectonics, climate or some other environmental factor. Note that the
> > first break, between Africa and Madagascar, comes before the secondary
> > breaks (between America and Africa, and between Madagascar-Seychelles,
> and
> > India - Java). This is congruent with the continental breakup sequence.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Ken Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Juerg,
> > > Well, certainly not a nude rock. However, as I explained in an
> > > earlier posting, the end-Cretaceous extinction wiped out a lot of taxa
> > > (most vertebrates and probably all mammals). This left it with a lot of
> > > empty niches which new mammals and birds, etc. would fill during the
> > > early-to-mid Tertiary.
> > > But I suppose John would deny that the end-Cretaceous extinction
> > > was that bad in Madagascar. I am giving up arguing with him about
> > > Madagascar, because he just repeats the same old fallback positions,
> and
> > > now claiming that there is no "analytical evidence" for dispersal to
> > > Madagascar. It might not be strictly analytical evidence according his
> > > definition of analytical, but there is plenty of evidence. He simply
> > > refuses to accept any of it. I should have given up trying to reason
> with
> > > him a long time ago.
> > > -------------------Ken Kinman
> > >
> > >
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > From: demarmjc at hotmail.com
> > > > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > > Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 17:00:29 -0400
> > > > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Panbiogeography
> > > >
> > > > Seeing the comments by our dispersalist friends, I wonder then,
> whether
> > > Madagascar was empty, a piece of nude rock, before the "great
> migration"
> > > out of Africa?
> > > > Juerg De Marmels
> > > >
>
>
>
>


-- 
Dunedin, New Zealand.

My recent books:

*Molecular panbiogeography of the tropics.* 2012. University of California
Press, Berkeley. www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520271968

*Biogeography of Australasia:  A molecular analysis*. 2014. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge. www.cambridge.org/9781107041028