Fwd: Re: [TAXACOM] genetic vs morphological trace of phylogeny

pierre deleporte pierre.deleporte at UNIV-RENNES1.FR
Thu Apr 8 20:57:20 CDT 2004

>At 03:06 PM 4/5/04 +0200, pierre deleporte wrote:
>>There are lasting problems as for which models of character evolution
>>should be implemented, both for morphoilogy or molecules (see many other
>>threads), but I never read a convincing argument that some potential
>>source of phylogenetic information should be completely discarded.
>John Grehan wrote: AGREED!!!!!!!! I'm really glad to see some agreement
>here. However it is the molecular primate phylogeneticists who are making
>just that very assertion - that morphology should be completely
>discarded!!!!!!!! They are saying that the problem of our nearest relative
>has been completely solved - it is a fact that the chimp is our nearest

Not agreed. You discard molecules and shouldn't. Why not apply your
principles to yourself?


More information about the Taxacom mailing list