FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2093236421> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2093236421 endingPage "764" @default.
• W2093236421 startingPage "763" @default.
• W2093236421 abstract "In his Perspective “Early hominids—diversity or distortion?” (28 March, p. 1994), Tim White criticizes fellow paleoanthropologists for too often identifying as separate species, or even genera, specimens that in reality had belonged to the same species. He presents two bonobo skulls (differing in supraorbital toral thickness, midfacial robusticity, subnasal elongation, and orbital shape) and argues that, if they were hominid specimens, some paleoanthropologists would place them in separate taxa. Perhaps. But variability aside, these bonobos are essentially identical in toral and midfacial morphological detail. One has a more exaggerated subnasal curvature and subovoid orbits, while the other's orbits are more rectangular. Thus, orbital shape notwithstanding, these specimens vary in ways expected of members of the same species, i.e., in degree of expression, not kind, of morphology.Nevertheless, White's distrust of claims of hominid diversity is partly understandable. Often, type specimens lack morphological detail and taxonomic judgements are based on nonbiological criteria, e.g., time and/or geography. Unfortunately, once published, hominid taxa, and usually only the describers' interpretations of them, are perpetuated through media hype and marketing pressures for textbooks to be “up to date.”How might one propose a new taxon? Following the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, first compare your specimens with the type specimens (holotypes) of recognized taxa to determine if they represent one of them. If not, conservatively suggest that the specimens constitute a morph (a group of specimens united by uniquely shared morphologies) or propose a new species and/or genus.In contrast to this taxonomic procedure, systematic analysis yields hierarchies of hypotheses. For example, first hypothesize morphs on the basis of morphologically sound specimens. With further study, you might combine some morphs and/or subdivide others. Then, theorize patterns of relationship between morphs. This may lead to taxonomic decisions (e.g., morphs as species), but you can also start addressing questions of diversity. Of course, one systematist's morph or species might be another's species or genus, but this conceit is far less important than elucidating patterns of relationship. Thus, suppose I delineate groups A, B, and C and identify them as different species, or even genera, but A and B actually belonged to the same species. If I conclude that A and B are more closely related to each other than either is to C, my conclusion remains viable. For example, if I refer White's bonobos to different taxa, specific morphologies of “being bonobo” should still lead me to conclude that they shared a common ancestor not shared with specimens of other taxa.# RESPONSE {#article-title-2}Schwartz raises the issue of methods by which fossil species are recognized. He provides a surprising view into the methods he uses to recognize early hominid species diversity [which presumably led to his suggestion of three contemporary Homo taxa from a single Dmanisi stratum and locality ([1][1])]. Schwartz's approach is overtly typological. He contends that within-species variation is “in degree of expression, not kind, of morphology.”Biology abandoned the Platonic concept of “essences” long ago. Even in paleoanthropology, the typological approach has had rare overt application since its popularity peaked during the first half of the 1900s. Operationally, Schwartz suggests “first compare your specimens with the type specimens (holotypes) of recognized taxa to determine if they represent one of them.” As Mayr noted in 1969, “Species consist of variable populations, and no single specimen can represent this variability.” ([2][2], p. 369). In a comment directly relevant to the question of Kenyanthropus , Simpson noted 42 years ago that the “[f]inal decision as to conspecific status depends, however, not on nearness to any one specimen, type or other, but on falling within or outside of ranges of variation inferred for the whole taxon.” [[3][3], p. 184), his italics]. In modern paleontology, comparison with the hypodigm (the available fossil record of a taxon) is the criterion for taxonomic recognition. Schwartz's typology represents a different approach.Hominoid fossils are rare, and decades of research have shown how easy it is for trivial, normal individual variation to be confounded with a real taxonomic signal—particularly when typologists use individual fossils as the units of comparison. Compounding the problem today is the fact that limited sets of morphological data are often subjectively employed in cladistic and phenetic analyses. Here, the subjective dichotomous categorization of continuous skeletal variation combines with the lack of appreciation for intragroup variation to produce erroneous phylogenetic and taxonomic conclusions. The two bonobo crania I illustrated, beyond those features Schwartz notes, show variation in zygomatic root position and lower facial projection, “characters” used to support the purportedly new genus and species Kenyanthropus platyops . The apparent lack of appreciation for such degrees of normal within-species variation, compounded by geological distortion of the fossil, led to the erection of the questionable taxon, the subject of my Perspective. Schwartz does not provide any evidence to support the hypothesis that this fossil is a species separate from Australopithecus afarensis .1. 1.[↵][4]1. J. H. Schwartz , Science 289, 55 (2000). [OpenUrl][5][CrossRef][6][PubMed][7]2. 2.[↵][8]1. E. Mayr , Principles of Systematic Zoology (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969). 3. 3.[↵][9]1. G. G. Simpson , Principles of Animal Taxonomy (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1961). [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-2 [3]: #ref-3 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1. in text [5]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DScience%26rft.volume%253D289%26rft.spage%253D55%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1007%252Fs004030050153%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F10928927%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [6]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s004030050153&link_type=DOI [7]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10928927&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fsci%2F301%2F5634%2F763.3.atom [8]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2. in text [9]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3. in text" @default.
• W2093236421 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2093236421 creator A5003445426 @default.
• W2093236421 date "2003-08-08" @default.
• W2093236421 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W2093236421 title "Another Perspective on Hominid Diversity" @default.
• W2093236421 cites W1991296110 @default.
• W2093236421 cites W2144907661 @default.
• W2093236421 doi "https://doi.org/10.1126/science.301.5634.763c" @default.
• W2093236421 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12907778" @default.
• W2093236421 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W2093236421 type Work @default.
• W2093236421 sameAs 2093236421 @default.
• W2093236421 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2093236421 countsByYear W20932364212014 @default.
• W2093236421 countsByYear W20932364212016 @default.
• W2093236421 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2093236421 hasAuthorship W2093236421A5003445426 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C12713177 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C151730666 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C153349607 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C157369684 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C2777299769 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C53553401 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C71640776 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C78458016 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C90856448 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C12713177 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C142362112 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C151730666 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C153349607 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C157369684 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C205649164 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C2777299769 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C53553401 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C71640776 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C78458016 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C86803240 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C90856448 @default.
• W2093236421 hasConceptScore W2093236421C95457728 @default.
• W2093236421 hasIssue "5634" @default.
• W2093236421 hasLocation W20932364211 @default.
• W2093236421 hasLocation W20932364212 @default.
• W2093236421 hasOpenAccess W2093236421 @default.
• W2093236421 hasPrimaryLocation W20932364211 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W1936340432 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W1987127029 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W1989171753 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W1996804667 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W1997827040 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2034110596 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2050933653 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2051176307 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2112080108 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2137415783 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2145241956 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2171891426 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2178587969 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2314370336 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2317730846 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2319083620 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2320237603 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2324666925 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W2498817731 @default.
• W2093236421 hasRelatedWork W3009384 @default.
• W2093236421 hasVolume "301" @default.
• W2093236421 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2093236421 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2093236421 magId "2093236421" @default.
• W2093236421 workType "article" @default.