67 



Pusa hispida 

 Pusa sibirica 

 Phoca vitulina 

 Pusa caspica 

 Phoca largha 

 Histriophoca 

 Pagophilus 

 Erignathus 

 Halichoerus 

 Cystophora 



Monachus schauinslandi 



Monachus tropicalis 



Monachus monachus 



Lobodon 



Ommatophoca 



Leptonychotes 



Hydrurga 



Mirounga angustirostris 



Mirounga leonina 



Enhydra 



Lutra 



Odobenus 



Zalophus 



Martes 



Procyon 



Ursus 



Canis 



Pusa hispida 

 Pusa sibirica 

 Phoca vitulina 

 Pusa caspica 

 Phoca largha 

 Erignathus 

 Histriophoca 

 Pagophilus 

 Halichoerus 

 Cystophora 



Monachus schauinslandi 



Monachus tropicalis 



Monachus monachus 



Lobodon 



Ommatophoca 



Leptonychotes 



Hydrurga 



Mirounga angustirostris 



Mirounga leonina 



Odobenus 



Zalophus 



Ursus 



Enhydra 



Lutra 



Martes 



Procyon 



Canis 



B 



D 



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 



Lutra 



Enhydra 



Martes 



Procyon 



Odobenus 



Zalophus 



Ursus 



Canis 



Pusa hispida 

 Pusa sibirica 

 Phoca vitulina 

 Pusa caspica 

 Phoca largha 

 Erignathus 

 Histriophoca 

 Pagophilus 

 Halichoerus 

 Cystophora 



Monachus schauinslandi 



Monachus tropicalis 



Monachus monachus 



Lobodon 



Ommatophoca 



Leptonychotes 



Hydrurga 



Mirounga angustirostris 



Mirounga leonina 



Ursus 



Odobenus 



Zalophus 



Enhydra 



Lutra 



Martes 



Procyon 



Canis 



Fig.l3A-D: Cladograms resulting from a constraint analysis examining various alternative hypotheses 

 of outgroup relationships: (A) (not) monophyly *, (B) diphyly *, (C) ursid - monophyly, and (D) 

 ursid - diphyly. An asterisk indicates a majority rule consensus solution, where, unless otherwise 

 indicated, all nodes were found in 100% of the equally most parsimonious solutions. See also Fig.3 

 and Tab. 3. 



