It is widely believed that behavior is more evolutionarily labile and/or more difficult to characterize than morphology, and thus that behavioral characters are not as useful as morphological characters for estimating phylogenetic relationships. To examine the relative utility of behavior and morphology for estimating phylogeny, we compared levels of homoplasy for morphological and behavioral characters that have been used in systematic studies. In an analysis of 22 data sets that contained both morphological and behavioral characters we found no significant difference between mean consistency indices (CIs, which measure homoplasy) within data sets for the two types of characters. In a second analysis we compared overall CIs for 8 data sets comprised entirely of behavioral characters with overall CIs for 32 morphological data sets and found no significant difference between the two types of data sets. For both analyses, 95% confidence limits on the difference between the two types of characters indicate that, even if given the benefit of the doubt, morphological characters could not have substantially higher mean CIs than behavioral characters. These results do not support the idea that behavioral characters are less useful than morphological characters for the estimation of phylogeny.
Keywords: Behavior; character evolution; consistency index; homoplasy; morphology; phylogeny.
© 1993 The Society for the Study of Evolution.