Phylogeny Reconstruction - cladistic methodology

Zach Valois

Zach Valois

New Member
Ok, my main interest and projects/aim in education focus on systematics. I have been keeping herps and inverts since I was a small child, but usually as a hobby. I now broker and breed these animals for a good portion of my income and had to jump into chams just to do something different, and let me tell you, I am hooked. What absolutely amazing animals (still think the montanes are way more rewarding that those such as F. pardalis).

So, as I was saying, I have training and interest geared toward systematics. Now most of my time has been spet working with arachnid systematics/taxonomy - but there is no way I can work with an animal without knowing something from this perspective.

With all the subgenera, subspecies, and complexes, chams are obviously not well studied in this respect.
I was curious on what basis are the most recent studies of this nature on? In other words, has any molecular based phylogenetics been done with chams, or is it mostly morphological?

Does anyone have any suggestions, links or pdfs for some of the most recent taxonomic/systematic work done on chams?

Are their any leading biologists working specifically with cham systematics and evolutionary biology?
 
There actually is quite a bit of molecular work that has been done in chameleons. Naturally there is also a lot of morphological and biogeographic work as well but a number of the currently recognized genera (and species) were actually erected based partially on molecular findings.

To be honest, there really are not that many subgenera or subspecies currently recognized. There has been a strong push in recent years to elevate most of these to full genera or species. At the moment, there are 10 genera and 3 subgenera recognized: Bradypodion, Brookesia, Calumma, Chamaeleo, Furcifer, Kinyongia, Nadzikambia, Rhampholeon (Rhampholeon), Rhampholeon (Bicuspis), Rhampholeon (Rhinodigitum), Rieppeleon and Trioceros.

Here are a few papers you might want to check out:
Townsend & Larson, 2002 (Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.); Tolley et al., 2004 (Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.); Tilbury et al., 2006 (Zootaxa); Tolley et al., 2006 (Mol. Ecol.); Mariaux & Tilbury, 2006 (Herpetol. J.); Tilbury & Tolley, 2009 (Zootaxa).

Chris
 
This is just what I was looking for, but managed to ramble on about other things.

Is anyone currently working with the "cristatus" or "fischeri" complexes?
 
Brad Ramsey has some cristatus as well as someone else that I can't think of off the top of my head. I hope to get some in the future. Good luck!
 
 
drewtt said:
What did you want to know about either of them?

Drew.
Click to expand...

I would ideally like to look at some of the most recent cladograms, at both the specific and general level. I am curious about their speciation, and phylogeography. If they are still termed a complex, they need more work. Bear in mind however, I have not yet looked at the description of Kinyonga - as this should have solved this problem.

Exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for. Thanks guys.
 
Bickel and Loso, 2002 is a very interesting paper, and is a good example of basic evolutionary biology.

I have noticed that some of the dwarf/pygmys have received some special attention. I have not read that paper yet [Mathee et al. 2004], but it looks like they have a great character matrix.

The Necas et al. 2009 paper is perhaps one of the most interesting. I will have to get that article and take a look. I am curious as to how they are literally defining and illustrating these species, and assessing morphological heterogeneity across some of complex members.

I am very interested to see just how the groups are related at the generic level. For example, are dwarfs and pygmys merely a product of convergent evolution, or do they actually form a monophyletic clade (which I'm sure has been answered, or at least investigated).
 
You can do some searches in the BioOne (Bioone.org) online journal database for chameleon related papers. I search threw there every once in a while on the Journal of Herpetology, and I found a neat one about the ecology of mountium, quadricornis, and pfefferi. You can search all the way back to past volumes. Im sure you can find what your looking for with that website. (if you don't already use it yourself) They also have a bunch of other journals like Herpetologica, and Herpetological Monographs. Hope this helps your adventures, and keep us updated on really informative papers / findings. We need more of this is the forums.

http://www.bioone.org/action/showPublications?type=byCategory
 
Zach Valois said:
This is just what I was looking for, but managed to ramble on about other things.

Is anyone currently working with the "cristatus" or "fischeri" complexes?
Click to expand...

Most of these complexes are simply artifacts of old sources that hobbyists are still referencing. Mariaux et al., 2008 (Zool. J. Linn. Soc.) redid the fischeri complex and it is quite well understood now. The cristatus complex hasn't been as well examined since Klaver & Boehme 1992 (Bonn. zool. Beitr.) due to the difficulties associated with exploration in Cameroon.

Zach Valois said:
I am very interested to see just how the groups are related at the generic level. For example, are dwarfs and pygmys merely a product of convergent evolution, or do they actually form a monophyletic clade (which I'm sure has been answered, or at least investigated).
Click to expand...

Different papers have found different patterns for the pymgy chameleons. They definitely do not appear to be a monophyletic clade. Tilbury & Tolley 2009 found that they are paraphyletic.

Chris
 
eisentrauti said:
If you search some work: It would be very interesting to see a revision of the rudis/sternfeldi/cf.rudis complex
Click to expand...

Yes, I think the T. rudis complex and the Ch. dilepis complex are two that are in the most need. I think both are being worked on at the moment but no idea when those papers will come out.

Chris
 
I'd gathered with the pygmies that Madagascar pygmies were more closely related to Madagascar "true" chameleons, and African pygs to African "true" chameleons, than either to each other, which would make biogeographical sense. (Got this from "Miniature Dragons of the Rainforest", which is a few years old by now.) Thanks for the article citations; I'll try to look up some of these. I do a lot of molecular systematics with fungi, where we have very few morphological characters to go by.
 
Wow, great discussion everyone!

I am definitely going to look more into this. However, if the arachnid guys find out I am interested in vertebrate systematics, I might be in trouble.

My initial thought is that the dwarfs and pygmys are indeed paraphyletic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

elizaann2
Internal Infection
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
TwinCitiesCrickets
T
R
Flaky scales on head and nose? Not shedding
Replies
5
Views
2K
Beman
Beman
Xmplary97
New Chameleon with Eye Issues
Replies
5
Views
1K
MissSkittles
MissSkittles
E
Chameleon closed eyes during the day
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
Sonny13
Sonny13
Gryllidae Per Kcal
My Conversation with Mark Finke.
Replies
1
Views
2K
regal81455
R
Back
Top Bottom