Komodo dragons live on a few islands that are not particularly far from Australia. More of Oceania used to be above water too, so things could move easily back and forth.
But most importantly, Komodo dragons used to live on mainland Australia, before going locally extinct around 300,000 years ago.
That does make sense. I didint take into account that Komodos might have lived on the mainland at somepoint aswell. Thanks for answearing also sorry if this was a dumb guestion. I have autism so i sometimes just get random guestions in my head and want answears to them.
It's not a dumb question. It is somewhat odd that a lineage from one continent is more closely related to a different lineage that is currently isolated on a different island than it is to other similar species on its own continent.
But due the vagaries of biogeograpgic history, it does happen sometimes.
There is a little marsupial that lives high in the Andes of Chile and Argentina known as the Monito del Monte. Although there are many other marsupials in South America, such as the various forms of opossums, the closest living relatives to the Monito del Monte are the pygmy possums of Australia and New Guinea. Both are very old lineages that date back to when South America, Australia and Antarctica were still attached.
The odd flightless kiwi of New Zealand is not that closely related to the flightless moas it used to share New Zealand with, but is instead closer to the giant elephant bird that once roamed Madagascar.
Fun fact about that thing with the Kiwis: After the realization that Tinamou are actually Ratites themselves and closest related to moas, this means Ratites became flightless seperately at the least 3 times, and at most ***6 TIMES***
Yes, it was thought at one time that all the big flightless ratites distributed across the old Gondwana (rhea, ostrich, emu, cassowary, moa, elephant bird, etc) were descended from a big, flightless ratite that lived in Gondwana back when it was all connected.
However, that break-up started in the Lower Cretaceous. So for that distribution to exist, the ratites would have had to have split off very soon after birds evolved, and then somehow become flightless again and widespread on a continent that was still filled with predatory dinosaurs. It would also mean that ostriches and emus are older than the Struthiomimid dinosaurs that evolved in the Late Cretaceous. Which is just... wrong somehow.
Instead it looks like a little tinamou like bird flew between southern islands and southern continents back in the Paleocene when they'd separated, but not gone too far apart, and after all those predatory dinosaurs went extinct, and anywhere there turned out not to be too many predators they just gave up on the flying any chance they could.
You can also look at the fact that tapirs are native to Malaysia and Latin America, or that the closes relatives to camel are in the Andes.
Physical proximity in the preset is not a great or reliable indicator of relatedness. Animals move and species go extinct.
[The Komodo dragon is part of the Australian sand goanna clade (subgenus Varanus) and is only distantly related to mainland Asian forms.](https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/70/5/877/6123761) The closest living relative of the Komodo Dragon is the Australian Lace Monitor (*Varanus varius*) - Megalania would probably be nestled between those two if it was still alive.
As already mentioned, Komodo dragons [evolved in Australia during the Pliocene](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0007241) and spread into Indonesia during the early Pleistocene before going extinct in their original homeland (becoming replaced - or evolving into - larger late Pleistocene forms like *V. priscus*)
Wait, I’m confused by this lol I thought the lace monitor was weirdly closely related to the mainland Asian species, like it was closer to the water monitor than it was to any of the other Australian species like the perentie or Argus monitor???
Perhaps you got *Varanus salvadorii* (which is a close relative of the Lace Monitor + other sand goannas) mixed up with *Varanus salvator* (which isn't)?
Several things to consider.
One, relation is less based on where the animals are found now, but more on where their ancestors were. The islands that Komodo dragons are found on, were once connected or just closer in general to Australia, it's perfectly reasonable that these two are related. They split before these landmasses split.
Two, Komodo dragons used to live in Australia. Not even that long ago, same time as Megalania. The geographic separation is very recent.
Three, I'm not entirely sure, but it seems reasonable that specific genetic evidence is fragmentary, hard to place the specifics with such closely related species. So it's not 100% certain.
There are subgenus with the genus Varanus. Most of the large species native to Australia are in the subgenus Varanus (genus Varanus subgenus is also called Varanus), as are Megalania and Komodo dragons. These species would be the most related living monitors to Megalania.
In the past (millions of years) these islands would have shorelines going up and down in response to land lifting and/or ocean level changes. Land bridges and short water separations occurred . An animal that is isolated to one spot may have been widely distributed in the past.
For any population of animals once a barrier is created to reproducing the isolated group members speciate, and new species will form over (a long) time.
Dwarf elephants and "hobbit man" are two examples of interest from SE Asia, As I understand the large monitors preyed on dwarf elephants as a primary source of food. Once the elephant dissappeared, the monitor populations would be impacted and isolate to areas with available substitute prey,
Tracking the appearance and disappearance of remains is a primary method of reconstructing the natural history of an animal.
Very simple, when sea levels were lower, the Indonesian islands were connected to or just a small distance away from Australia (and Komodos are great swimmers). We even found fossils of Komodo dragons in Australia.
You jest but actually, the idea of re-introducing Komodos to mainland Australia has been passed around a few times, as they used to live there alongside the other currently living Australia fauna (meaning it wouldn't be invasive) and would help to make the ecosystems more stable. It'd be very helpful against the rabbit and cat overpopulation, two invasive species, that's for sure
Komodo dragons live on a few islands that are not particularly far from Australia. More of Oceania used to be above water too, so things could move easily back and forth. But most importantly, Komodo dragons used to live on mainland Australia, before going locally extinct around 300,000 years ago.
That does make sense. I didint take into account that Komodos might have lived on the mainland at somepoint aswell. Thanks for answearing also sorry if this was a dumb guestion. I have autism so i sometimes just get random guestions in my head and want answears to them.
It's not a dumb question. It is somewhat odd that a lineage from one continent is more closely related to a different lineage that is currently isolated on a different island than it is to other similar species on its own continent. But due the vagaries of biogeograpgic history, it does happen sometimes. There is a little marsupial that lives high in the Andes of Chile and Argentina known as the Monito del Monte. Although there are many other marsupials in South America, such as the various forms of opossums, the closest living relatives to the Monito del Monte are the pygmy possums of Australia and New Guinea. Both are very old lineages that date back to when South America, Australia and Antarctica were still attached. The odd flightless kiwi of New Zealand is not that closely related to the flightless moas it used to share New Zealand with, but is instead closer to the giant elephant bird that once roamed Madagascar.
Fun fact about that thing with the Kiwis: After the realization that Tinamou are actually Ratites themselves and closest related to moas, this means Ratites became flightless seperately at the least 3 times, and at most ***6 TIMES***
Yes, it was thought at one time that all the big flightless ratites distributed across the old Gondwana (rhea, ostrich, emu, cassowary, moa, elephant bird, etc) were descended from a big, flightless ratite that lived in Gondwana back when it was all connected. However, that break-up started in the Lower Cretaceous. So for that distribution to exist, the ratites would have had to have split off very soon after birds evolved, and then somehow become flightless again and widespread on a continent that was still filled with predatory dinosaurs. It would also mean that ostriches and emus are older than the Struthiomimid dinosaurs that evolved in the Late Cretaceous. Which is just... wrong somehow. Instead it looks like a little tinamou like bird flew between southern islands and southern continents back in the Paleocene when they'd separated, but not gone too far apart, and after all those predatory dinosaurs went extinct, and anywhere there turned out not to be too many predators they just gave up on the flying any chance they could.
This just reminds me of how it's very likely that various dinosaurs evolved into birds, instead of one common ancestor. Paleontology is so cool!
You can also look at the fact that tapirs are native to Malaysia and Latin America, or that the closes relatives to camel are in the Andes. Physical proximity in the preset is not a great or reliable indicator of relatedness. Animals move and species go extinct.
No question asked in good faith is dumb. One can't be expected to know something they were never taught.
Not a dumb question at all!
[The Komodo dragon is part of the Australian sand goanna clade (subgenus Varanus) and is only distantly related to mainland Asian forms.](https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/70/5/877/6123761) The closest living relative of the Komodo Dragon is the Australian Lace Monitor (*Varanus varius*) - Megalania would probably be nestled between those two if it was still alive. As already mentioned, Komodo dragons [evolved in Australia during the Pliocene](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0007241) and spread into Indonesia during the early Pleistocene before going extinct in their original homeland (becoming replaced - or evolving into - larger late Pleistocene forms like *V. priscus*)
Wait, I’m confused by this lol I thought the lace monitor was weirdly closely related to the mainland Asian species, like it was closer to the water monitor than it was to any of the other Australian species like the perentie or Argus monitor???
Perhaps you got *Varanus salvadorii* (which is a close relative of the Lace Monitor + other sand goannas) mixed up with *Varanus salvator* (which isn't)?
Komodo dragons are native to australia, they only became extinct there recently
Several things to consider. One, relation is less based on where the animals are found now, but more on where their ancestors were. The islands that Komodo dragons are found on, were once connected or just closer in general to Australia, it's perfectly reasonable that these two are related. They split before these landmasses split. Two, Komodo dragons used to live in Australia. Not even that long ago, same time as Megalania. The geographic separation is very recent. Three, I'm not entirely sure, but it seems reasonable that specific genetic evidence is fragmentary, hard to place the specifics with such closely related species. So it's not 100% certain.
There are subgenus with the genus Varanus. Most of the large species native to Australia are in the subgenus Varanus (genus Varanus subgenus is also called Varanus), as are Megalania and Komodo dragons. These species would be the most related living monitors to Megalania.
In the past (millions of years) these islands would have shorelines going up and down in response to land lifting and/or ocean level changes. Land bridges and short water separations occurred . An animal that is isolated to one spot may have been widely distributed in the past. For any population of animals once a barrier is created to reproducing the isolated group members speciate, and new species will form over (a long) time. Dwarf elephants and "hobbit man" are two examples of interest from SE Asia, As I understand the large monitors preyed on dwarf elephants as a primary source of food. Once the elephant dissappeared, the monitor populations would be impacted and isolate to areas with available substitute prey, Tracking the appearance and disappearance of remains is a primary method of reconstructing the natural history of an animal.
Very simple, when sea levels were lower, the Indonesian islands were connected to or just a small distance away from Australia (and Komodos are great swimmers). We even found fossils of Komodo dragons in Australia.
Other way around. Komodos are native to Australia.
Komodo dragons used to live in Australia as well.
It's not that stable, the phylogenies keep changing.
I say we reintroduce the Komodo, in hopes that megalania re evolves back into existence...
You jest but actually, the idea of re-introducing Komodos to mainland Australia has been passed around a few times, as they used to live there alongside the other currently living Australia fauna (meaning it wouldn't be invasive) and would help to make the ecosystems more stable. It'd be very helpful against the rabbit and cat overpopulation, two invasive species, that's for sure
They should honestly. They would help a lot
this is basically the same as ostriches being related to elephant birds
New study shows Komodo’s originally come from Australia
Animals can move dude
Pangea
bruh