Abstract

DONATO, Mariano  and  MIRANDA-ESQUIVEL, Daniel Rafael. A reply to Escalante (2011) "About how Parsimony Analysis of Endemicity does not explain natural selection either". Rev. Mex. Biodiv. [online]. 2012, vol.83, n.3, pp.892-896. ISSN 2007-8706.  https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.29384.

We discuss some topics which we believe are controversial on Escalante's work (2011). Both, the definition of PAE and the classification of the types of PAE proposed by the author do not accurately reflect the proposal by the original authors. The defense that the author makes is not justified. The argument used to dismiss these criticisms are inconsistent with the classification proposed for the PAE. PAE as historical method aims at discovering relationships between areas. Thus, we believe that having the same objectives as the methods of cladistic biogeography allow us the comparison. PAE considers the endemic species in shared areas as indicative of a shared history, similar to the implementation of the assumption 0 and similar to phylogenetic systematics synapomorphies. The presence of such species in these areas could also be explained by recent dispersal events, or because they are favorable ecological conditions. The question made to PAE is essential for obtaining consistent hypothesis, but not necessarily the correct answer obtained with PAE.

Keywords : criticism; assumption 0; cladistic biogeography; comparison of methods.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )