Methods in vicariance biogeography: Assessment of the implementations of assumptions 0, 1, and 2

As we have argued previously, for the valid derivation of general area clad ograms in vicariance biogeography, two requirements should be met. First, s ets of area cladograms derived under assumptions 0, 1 and 2 should be inclu sive (requirement I). Second, general area cladograms should be based on ar ea cladograms, for different monophyletic groups, derived under the same as sumption (requirement II). We now assess for their actual implementation of assumptions AO, Al, and A2 and for the extent to which they meet requireme nts I and II, the following methods (and correlated computer programs): Com ponent Compatibility Analysis (CAFCA), Brooks Parsimony Analysis (PAUP), Co mponent Analysis (Component 1.5), Reconciled Tree Analysis (Component 2.0), and Three Area Statement Analysis (TAS). For this purpose we use empirical (Heterandria, Xiphophorus, Cyttaria, Eriococcus/Madarococcus) and theoreti cal data sets. All programs appear to violate, to a different degree, requi rement I (deriving inclusive sets of area cladograms under assumptions) whe n dealing with sympatric taxa under Al or AZ. Dealing with sympatric taxa a posteriori only prevents this violation. All programs examined appear to m eet requirement II (deriving general area cladograms under a single assumpt ion). (C) 2000 The Willi Hennig Society.