Reptile relationships turn turtle⃛

Michael S. Y. Lee ()
Additional contact information
Michael S. Y. Lee: School of Biological Sciences, University of Sydney

Nature, 1997, vol. 389, issue 6648, 245-245

Abstract: Abstract Turtles are so anatomically bizarre that their affinities with other reptiles remain contentious. Wilkinson et al.1 showed how even the extensive morphological information amassed by Rieppel and deBraga2,3 provides only weak support for their view that turtles are advanced diapsid reptiles, rather than descendants of primitive anapsid reptiles, as conventionally thought. But there seem to be errors in Rieppel and deBraga's data matrix, many involving turtles or their putative ‘anapsid’ relatives4,5. I have corrected and reanalysed the data (see ‘Incorrectly coded characters’, overleaf), and find that Rieppel and deBraga's data actually support, rather than challenge, the traditional view.

Date: 1997
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/38422 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:nature:v:389:y:1997:i:6648:d:10.1038_38422

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/

DOI: 10.1038/38422

Access Statistics for this article

Nature is currently edited by Magdalena Skipper

More articles in Nature from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().