41 



B 



i-U 



| 4 ' 



35 I 



rp 



r 



P— 44 1—38 fc 



l . 5 LJT' 



p— 49 L 



• 50 I— 



Histriophoca 

 Pagophilus 

 Erignathus 

 Pusa hispida 

 Pusa sibirica 

 Pusa caspica 

 Phoca vitulina 

 Phoca largha 

 Halichoerus 

 Cystophora 



Monachus schauinslandi 



Monachus tropicalis 



Monachus monachus 



Lobodon 



Ommatophoca 



Leptonychotes 



Hydrurga 



Mirounga angustirostris 



Mirounga leonina 



Odobenus 



Zalophus 



Lutra 



Enhydra 



Martes 



Procyon 



Urs us 



Can is 



18/16 



28/13 



12/13 



31/30 



15/13 





111 





10/13 



12/2! 





1 1 /1 0 1 1 15/20 



10/5 | 



"— 1 23/21 



B/12 rn 



15/17 



12/16 



18/21 



23/19 



14/7 



12/16 



17/13 



11/13 



18/24 



Histriophoca 

 Pagophilus 

 Erignathus 

 Pusa hispida 

 Pusa sibirica 

 Pusa caspica 

 Phoca vitulina 

 Phoca largha 

 Halichoerus 

 Cystophora 



Monachus schauinslandi 



Monachus tropicalis 



Monachus monachus 



Lobodon 



Ommatophoca 



Leptonychotes 



Hydrurga 



Mirounga angustirostris 



Mirounga leonina 



Odobenus 



Zalophus 



Lutra 



Enhydra 



Martes 



Procyon 



Ursus 



Canis 



Fig.5B-C: Cladograms resulting from a parsimony analysis of the inversely weighted data matrix. 

 (B) Consensus tree (identical between strict and majority rule algorithms) for the solutions in (A), 

 with internal nodes numbered. All nodes were found in 100% of the equally most parsimonious 

 solutions. (C) As for (B), but with unweighted branch lengths (presented as accelerated transformation 

 / delayed transformation). 



