Les mondes darwiniens

805 / 1576
[h e n r i c a p / c o m p o rt e m e n t et évolution : r egar ds c roisés]
portement chez les vertébrés pour établir leurs relations de parentés sont
de deux types : l’application du critère d’homologie au comportement serait
problématique, et il serait plus sensible aux phénomènes de convergences
que les caractères morphologiques ou moléculaires 61 . Ces critiques ont été
fortement rejetées par de nombreux biologistes 62 qui plaident, au contraire,
en faveur de son utilisation intensive en systématique, ce qui nous amène
maintenant à entrevoir les liens étroits qu’entretient l’éthologie avec la systématique
phylogénétique.
behavior”, Cladistics, 22 @. (c) Irwin (1996), “The phylogenetic content of Avian
courtship display and song evolution”, in Martins (ed.), Phylogenies and the comparative
method in animal behaviour, Oxford UP @. Prum (1990), “Phylogenetic
analysis of the evolution of display behavior in the neotropical manakins (Aves :
Pipridae)”, Ethology, 84 @. McCracken & Sheldon (1997), “Avian vocalizations and
phylogenetic signal”, PNAS USA, 94 @. Cicero & Johnson (1998), “Molecular phylogeny
and ecological diversification in a clade of New World songbirds (genus Vireo)”,
Mol. Ecol., 7 @. Zyskowski & Prum (1999), “Phylogenetic analysis of the nest architecture
of Neotropical ovenbirds (Furnariidae)”, Auk, 116 @. (d) Kiley-Worthington
(1984), “Animal language ? Vocal communication of some ungulates, canids and
felids”, Acta Zool. Fennica, 171. Macedonia & Stranger (1994), “Phylogeny of the
Lemuridae revisited : Evidence from communication signals”, Folia Primatologica,
63. Kurt & Hartl (1995), “Socio-ethogram of adult males versus biochemical-genetic
variation in assessing phylogenetic relationships of the Caprinae”, Acta Theriologica,
suppl. 3. Peters & Hast (1994), “Hyoid structure, laryngeal anatomy and vocalization
in felids (Mammalia : Carnivora : Felidae)”, Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde, 59.
Peters & Tonkin-Leyhausen (1999), “Evolution of acoustic communication signals
of mammals : friendly close-range vocalizations in Felidae (Carnivora)”, Journal
of Mammalian Evolution, 6 @. Cap et al. (2002), “The phylogeny and behaviour
of Cervidae (Ruminantia Pecora)”, Ethology Ecology & Evolution, 14 @. Cap et al.
(2008), “Male vocal behavior and phylogeny in deer”, Cladistics, 24 @. Lusseau
(2003), “The emergence of cetaceans : phylogenetic analysis of male social behaviour
supports the Cetartiodactyla clade”, J. Evol. Biol., 16 @.
61. de Queiroz & Wimberger (1993), “The useful of behavior for phylogeny estimation :
levels of homoplasy in behavioral and morphological characters”, Evolution, 47 @.
62. Brooks & McLennan (1991), Phylogeny, Ecology and Behavior, University of Chicago
Press @. Wenzel (1992), “Behavioral homology and phylogeny”, Annu. Rev. Ecol.
Syst., 23 @. Miller & Wenzel (1995),“Ecological characters and phylogeny”, Annu.
Rev. Entomol., 40 @. Wimberger & de Queiroz (1996), “Comparing behavioral and
morphological characters as indicators of phylogeny”, in Martins (ed.), Phylogenies
and the comparative method in animal behavior, Oxford UP @. Grandcolas et al.
(2001), “Phylogenetics and ecology : as many characters as possible should be included
in the cladistic analysis”, Cladistics, 17 @. Robillard et al. (2006), “Evolution of
advertisement signals in North American hylid frogs : vocalizations as end-products
of calling behavior”, Cladistics, 22 @.