Predictivity vs Useful

Richard.Zander at MOBOT.ORG Richard.Zander at MOBOT.ORG
Thu Feb 17 08:21:41 CST 2005

One must be wary of ascribing consilience to morphological traits that are
discovered to happen to agree with molecular data when there exist possibly
equal numbers of traits that do not agree (conformance rationalization) and
support other arrangements. Jinking from one set of traits to another is
okay if one set can be discounted in some way (e.g. statistically).
Otherwise, the contrary sets remain to annoy.

Richard H. Zander
Bryology Group, Missouri Botanical Garden
PO Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA
richard.zander at <mailto:richard.zander at>
Voice: 314-577-5180;  Fax: 314-577-9595
Bryophyte Volumes of Flora of North America:
Res Botanica:
Shipping address for UPS, etc.:
Missouri Botanical Garden
4344 Shaw Blvd.
St. Louis, MO 63110 USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Roth [mailto:barry_roth at YAHOO.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] Predictivity vs Useful

Thank you.  I would say therefore that your two examples demonstrate well
power of genealogy/phylogeny-based classifications to generate correct
predictions.  It's particularly neat that the results from one data set
(molecular) led to consilient results in another (morphological) set.


--- Peter Stevens <peter.stevens at MOBOT.ORG> wrote:

> >Yes, of molecular data.
> P.
> >Peter,
> >
> >Were the new classifications (Plstyspermation to Alseuosmiaceae and
> >Soyauxia to
> >Peridiscaceae) based on phylogenetic analyses?  That is, were the
> >groups formed
> >by these (and related?) re-allocations hypothesized to be monophyletic?
> >
> >Best,
> >
> >Barry

Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!

More information about the Taxacom mailing list