[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>> ancestor's lineage split off from the horse lineage.  Plenty of   
   >>>>>> time to reevolve claws.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The relevant clawed clade is Ferae, not Carnivora. (To the best of   
   >>>>> my knowledge miacids are not hooved; viverravids are not hooved;   
   >>>>> oxyaenids are not hooved; hyaenodonts are not hooved; pangolins are   
   >>>>> not hooved; and pantolestids are not hooved.) The consensus date   
   >>>>> for Ferae is 65 million years ago. Wikipedia gives a date for 73-85   
   >>>>> million years for Scrotifera, but the relevant nodes, depending on   
   >>>>> topology, are Zooamata or Ferungulata, which are younger.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> As support for hooves as a convergent trait, not all mesonychians   
   >>>>> (which are stem artiodactyls) possessed hooves. However there is   
   >>>>> dispute whether the hoofless mesonychians (arctocyonids) are stem-   
   >>>>> artiodactyls.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's also the case that not all (or any??) stem-perissodactyls are   
   >>>> hooved, and even some crown-perissodactyls aren't (chalicotheres).   
   >>>> I'd say that convergence in hoofiness is considerably more   
   >>>> parsimonious given the data, even forgetting about Dollo's Law.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> I believe that notoungulates and litopterns are hoofed stem-   
   >>> perissodactyls. If chalicotheres are primitively clawed, this   
   >>> requires convergence in Hippomorpha, Ceratomorpha,   
   >>> Notoungulata/Litopterna, and possibly other groups.   
   >>>   
   >> It's also possible that chalicothere claws, which actually are a bit   
   >> weird-looking, are a real example of a reversal. I'm also wondering   
   >> what Ambulocetus, etc., digits look like.   
   >>   
   >   
   > The article that I read claimed that Ambulocetus had the bones at the   
   > tip of it's toes are slightly flattened on top indicating that it had   
   > hooves, but the bones did not show the widening that would indicate some   
   > type of substantial hoof.  I can't recall exactly, but they might have   
   > called them some type of fingernail like hoof.   
      
   See? And all without needing a mummy.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)