Desutter-Grandcolas Laure, Legendre Frédéric, Grandcolas Philippe, Robillard Tony, Murienne Jérôme
Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Département Systématique et Evolution, UMR 5202 CNRS, CP n°50 (Entomologie), 45 rue Buffon, F-75231 Paris Cedex 05, France.
Cladistics. 2005 Feb;21(1):51-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2004.00047.x.
In comparative biology, character observations initially separate similar and dissimilar characters. Only similar characters are considered for phylogeny reconstruction; their homology is attested in a two-step process, firstly a priori of phylogeny reconstruction by accurate similarity statements, and secondly a posteriori of phylogeny analysis by congruence with other characters. Any pattern of non-homology is then a homoplasy, commonly, but vaguely, associated with "convergence". In this logical scheme, there is no way to analyze characters which look similar, but cannot meet usual criteria for homology statements, i.e., false similarity detected a priori of phylogenetic analysis, even though such characters may represent evolutionarily significant patterns of character transformations. Because phylogenies are not only patterns of taxa relationships but also references for evolutionary studies, we propose to redefine the traditional concepts of parallelism and convergence to associate patterns of non-homology with explicit theoretical contexts: homoplasy is restricted to non-similarity detected a posteriori of phylogeny analysis and related to parallelism; non-similarity detected a priori of phylogenetic analysis and necessarily described by different characters would then correspond to a convergence event s. str. We propose to characterize these characters as heterologous (heterology). Heterology and homoplasy correspond to different non-similarity patterns and processes; they are also associated with different patterns of taxa relationships: homoplasy can occur only in non-sister group taxa; no such limit exists for heterology. The usefulness of these terms and concepts is illustrated with patterns of acoustic evolution in ensiferan insects.
在比较生物学中，特征观察最初会区分相似和不相似的特征。只有相似的特征才会被用于系统发育重建；它们的同源性通过两步过程得到证实，首先是在系统发育重建之前，通过准确的相似性陈述进行先验判断，其次是在系统发育分析之后，通过与其他特征的一致性进行后验判断。任何非同源模式都是一种同功相似，通常但模糊地与“趋同”相关联。在这个逻辑框架中，没有办法分析那些看起来相似但不符合同源性陈述通常标准的特征，即系统发育分析之前检测到的假相似性，尽管这些特征可能代表了具有进化意义的特征转变模式。因为系统发育不仅是分类单元关系的模式，也是进化研究的参考，我们建议重新定义传统的平行进化和趋同概念，将非同源模式与明确的理论背景联系起来：同功相似仅限于系统发育分析后检测到的非相似性，并与平行进化相关；系统发育分析之前检测到的非相似性，且必然由不同特征描述的，则对应于狭义的趋同事件。我们建议将这些特征描述为异源的（异源性）。异源性和同功相似对应于不同的非相似性模式和过程；它们也与不同的分类单元关系模式相关：同功相似只能发生在非姐妹群分类单元中；而异源性则没有这样的限制。这些术语和概念的实用性通过螽斯科昆虫的声学进化模式得到了说明。
