Indeed I have.
I am not so sure you do not know how to be an a-—, though, don’t pat yourself on the back.
As you are so educated, answer the question (or at least address it) as to what differences in genomic structures do they expect based upon their “findings [that] challenge some long-standing assumptions about evolution” in contrast to what would be expected under the “long standing assumptions?”
Quotes from the article:
1. It is generally expected that when organisms evolve new features — or ‘key innovations’ — that enable them to exploit new environments, the rate of evolution and diversification will speed up. This is believed to have happened with the evolution of birds from dinosaurs and, most iconically of all, in the transition from finned aquatic fish to limbed tetrapods.(long held assumption)
2. Our work challenges this received wisdom, and shows that, at least in the case of the evolution of early tetrapods, key innovations did not quickly lead to greater anatomical variety. (Challenge to long held assumptions).
Reading is your friend. Some of my earlier responses presupposed that the article had been read. That assumption sent me down the garden path of distinguishing between genetic conclusion and the study of comparative morphology.