RESUMO
By means of mitochondrial 12S rRNA sequencing of putative "yeti", "bigfoot", and other "anomalous primate" hair samples, a recent study concluded that two samples, presented as from the Himalayas, do not belong to an "anomalous primate", but to an unknown, anomalous type of ursid. That is, that they match 12S rRNA sequences of a fossil Polar Bear (Ursusmaritimus), but neither of modern Polar Bears, nor of Brown Bears (Ursusarctos), the closest relative of Polar Bears, and one that occurs today in the Himalayas. We have undertaken direct comparison of sequences; replication of the original comparative study; inference of phylogenetic relationships of the two samples with respect to those from all extant species of Ursidae (except for the Giant Panda, Ailuropodamelanoleuca) and two extinct Pleistocene species; and application of a non-tree-based population aggregation approach for species diagnosis and identification. Our results demonstrate that the very short fragment of the 12S rRNA gene sequenced by Sykes et al. is not sufficiently informative to support the hypotheses provided by these authors with respect to the taxonomic identity of the individuals from which these sequences were obtained. We have concluded that there is no reason to believe that the two samples came from anything other than Brown Bears. These analyses afforded an opportunity to test the monophyly of morphologically defined species and to comment on both their phylogenetic relationships and future efforts necessary to advance our understanding of ursid systematics.
RESUMO
Very little information exists relevant to the species grouping and phylogenetic relationships of the opossum genus Monodelphis Burnett. Of the clearly distinct named species, the least information is available for M. unistriata (Wagner), one of the world's most poorly known species of mammals. Extant specimens consist of the Brazilian holotype of a skin now without a skull and dating from almost 200 years ago, and a second specimen with skin and incomplete skull dating from over a hundred years ago and from Argentina. The most recent published notes on the holotype date from well over half a century ago and, all told, such notes, the earliest dating from 1842, add up to a highly fragmentary and contradictory picture. No observations whatsoever have ever been published for the second and more complete specimen. Also, no hypotheses have ever been made concerning the intrageneric affinities of M. unistriata and such affinities have also been obscure throughout the genus. Herein, we provide a detailed redescription of M. unistriata, the first published images of specimens, and the first account, beyond the previous few most vague and incomplete remarks, of the morphology of the skull. In an effort to ascertain the phylogenetic affinities of M. unistriata, we performed a combined molecular (cytochrome b) and nonmolecular (postcranial, cranial, integument, and karyotypic characters) parsimony analysis incorporating 27 species of didelphids, including 11 of Monodelphis. Our results strongly support the monophyly of Monodelphis, and place M. unistriata as sister group to M. iheringi, among the included species.
