Application of cladistics to terrane history—parsimony analysis of qualitative geological data

Abstract

Hypotheses of terrane dispersal or accretion can be represented graphically as branching diagrams (cladograms), but an assessment of competing hypotheses of terrane history requires a method of analysis of supporting evidence which resolves the most parsimonious explanation of all available data. Cladistics is a rigorous analytical method first developed for phylogeny reconstruction (i.e. biological history), but applicable to any hierarchical data set. Given appropriate definitions, the various types of geological, geophysical and biological data used to support hypotheses of fragmentation or fusion history for geological regions (terranes) assumed to have had independent geological histories can be organized hierarchically. Terrane fragmentation is equivalent to phylogenetic splitting of biological taxa, and standard algorithms for parsimony analysis may be directly applied. Terrane accretion may be represented as a coalescing area cladogram, and the supporting evidence also forms a hierarchical data set, but with two main differences. The less general attributes historically precede the more general (the reverse applies in phylogeny reconstruction), and the branching points (nodes on the cladogram), unlike hypothetical common ancestors in phylogeny reconstruction, represent defined geographic areas, with a geological structure which can be investigated. In cladistic reconstruction of evolutionary history the common ancestors are hypothetical, and their attributes can only be inferred from the distribution of attributes amongst the terminals (known biological taxa); in contrast, the end product of terrane accretion is a composite structure (geological province) within which juxtaposition of terranes may eliminate some of the possible historical sequences which led to its formation.