The Structure of Evolutionary Theory

(Michael S) #1

814 THE STRUCTURE OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY


the recognition) of species without autapomorphies. Such species arise frequently
in the modelled system as a necessary consequence of the chosen rules of
generation and the general logic of cladistic analysis. But, in neontological
practices of naming, a species without autapomorphies represents an oxymoronic
concept, and such taxa could never be designated at all. Lemen and Freeman
recognize this point in writing about their various forms of gradualistic modelling
(p. 1551): "When distinctness of species is demanded the lack of autapomorphies
may not be the most expected condition."



  1. Under punctuated equilibrium, "as the number of characters used in the
    analysis increases, the distribution of the number of autapomorphies per species
    becomes bimodal. Under gradualism, the distribution of autapomorphies remains
    unimodal under all conditions" (1538). This situation, a spinoff from their second
    criterion, arises because each branch, in an event of punctuated equilibrium,
    produces one changed descendant and one persisting ancestor—and the more
    characters you measure, the more you pick up the differences between stasis on
    one branch and change on the other. Under gradualism, total change correlates
    only with elapsed time; so accumulating autapomorphies should form a unimodal
    distribution so long as species duration remains unimodal as well.
    Lemen and Freeman found no bimodal distributions in real data, and therefore
    concluded again in favor of gradualism. But, once more, the differences between
    idealized modeling and data from real organisms scuttles this conclusion. In the
    models, we know for sure that long arms without branching are truly so
    constituted, for we have perfect information of all simulated events. These
    unbranched arms, under punctuated equilibrium, should accumulate no
    autapomorphies—and the low mode of the bimodal distribution arises thereby.
    But, in real data of cladograms based on living organisms, long unbranched arms
    usually (I would say, virtually always) record our ignorance of numerous and
    transient speciational branchings that quickly became extinct and left no fossil
    record. (Moreover, since Lemen and Freeman's cladograms only include living
    organisms, even if successful and well-represented fossil species existed, they
    would not be included.) When we note a long arm without branches on a modern
    cladogram, and then assume (as Lemen and Freeman did) that accumulated
    autapomorphies between node and terminus must have arisen gradually and
    anagenetically, we commit a major blunder. We have no idea how many
    unrecorded speciation events separate node and terminus, and we cannot assert that
    recorded autapomorphies did not occur at these (probably frequent) branchings. In
    other words, Lemen and Freeman's bimodality test assumes that unbranched arms
    of their cladograms truly feature no speciation events along their routes, whereas
    numerous transient and extinct species must populate effectively all of these
    pathways.
    Other applications of this method—modeling of alternative outcomes and
    testing of contrasting predictions against patterns of real data—have yielded results
    favorable to punctuated equilibrium. In a path breaking paper, Stanley (1975—see
    elaboration in Stanley, 1979 and 1982) first proposed this style of testing and
    developed four putative criteria, all affirming punctuated equilibrium.

Free download pdf