"Type 2: attachment to the subclavian between the axillary and coracoid.
"Type 3: attachment to the subclavian at the base of the coracoid.
"Type 4: attachment to the subclavian, but with a common root for both the coracoid and thoracic.
"Type 5: attachment to the subclavian medial to both the axillary and coracoid.
"Type 6: two separate thoracic arteries are present; the primary thoracic is the same as type 1 above, while the secondary thoracic is the same as type 3 or type 4 above."
Possibly the thoracic artery has undergone migration but apparent differences in its origin might well be due to differences in other vessels of the thoracic area. Additionally, there seems to be no reason to assume that the lateral position of the thoracic artery is the primitive one, or that the medial is the derived position, as is implied by the phrase "medial migration." Although the lateral site of attachment (type 1) is predominant in the lower orders of birds, and the medial attachment is found primarily in Passeriformes, a fact which may indicate that type 1 is the more primitive, it must nevertheless be kept in mind that a sequence of a single morphological character does not necessarily represent the phylogenetic sequence of the character itself (see Mayr, 1955:41).
Also, a given arterial arrangement might be independently derived more than once. If such has been the case, similarities in arterial arrangements in different taxa would sometimes be "chance similarities," that is to say, "resemblance in characteristics developed in separate taxa by independent causes and without causal relationship involving the similarity as such" (Simpson, 1961:79).
The particular arrangement of the arteries of the thoracic area also seems to be of limited value as a clue to taxonomic relationships. If the origin of any artery is determined by skeletal and muscular features, as I suggest, the artery perhaps ought not be considered as a separate character, but as part of a "character complex" that varies as a unit (see Mayr, Linsley, and Usinger, 1953:123). The skeleton offers a potential fossil record for consideration. Changes in the skeleton and muscles, great enough to affect the blood vessels, would probably be detected more easily than would the resulting vascular changes. Also, I did not find as much individual variation in the skeleton and muscles in the area studied as I did in the vascular system. In other words, within the bounds established by the skeletal and muscular features, the artery still exhibited individual variation in exact origin.