Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Olesen (1998)
A phylogenetic analysis of the Conchostraca and Cladocera (Crustacea, Branchiopoda, Diplostraca)Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 122
D. Walossek (1993)
The Upper Cambrian Rehbachiella and the phylogeny of Branchiopoda and CrustaceaFossils and Strata
G. Fryer (1995)
Phylogeny and adaptive radiation within the Anomopoda: a preliminary explorationHydrobiologia, 307
G. Fryer (1987)
A new classification of the branchiopod CrustaceaZoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 91
J. Olesen, Joel Martin, E. Roessler (1996)
External morphology of the male of Cyclestheria hislopi (Baird, 1859) (Crustacea, Branchiopoda, Spinicaudata), with a comparison of male claspers among the Conchostraca and Cladocera and its bearing on phylogeny of the ‘bivalved’ BranchiopodaZoologica Scripta, 25
NOTES AND NEWS BRANCHIOPOD PHYLOGENY — CONTINUED MORPHOLOGICAL SUPPORT FOR HIGHER TAXA LIKE THE DIPLOSTRACA AND CLADOCERA, AND FOR PARAPHYLY OF ‘CONCHOSTRACA’ AND ‘SPINICAUDATA’ BY JØRGEN OLESEN 1 / Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken15, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark INTRODUCTION In response to a recently published note by Fryer (2001), which addressed a short paper of mine (Olesen, 2000), in itself written as a response to a critical paper by Fryer (1999) of my original article on branchiopod phylogeny (Olesen, 1998), a few comments are here presented. First, it should be noted that what is really needed now concerning progress in our understanding of branchiopod phylogeny, are constructive contributions either supplying new information or providing more strict cladistic interpretation of already available information. The latest contributions by Fryer and myself have only little relevance in this context. Nevertheless, it is necessary for me to respond again, since there could be a danger that some will just accept the claims made by Fryer because of the well-deserved authority he constitutes. As a matter of fact, many of the comments made by Fryer (2001) are meaningless. While some parts of Fryer (1999) were welcome because real errors were detected in Olesen
Crustaceana – Brill
Published: Jan 1, 2002
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.