[Taxacom] real molecular data
John Grehan
jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
Fri Nov 14 12:56:35 CST 2008
> From: Karl Magnacca [mailto:kmagnacca at wesleyan.edu]
> It's not my field so I don't know if it's defining, but this looks
like
> a decent one: Molecular Evidence on Primate Phylogeny From DNA
> Sequences, Goodman et al. 1994, American Journal of Physical
> Anthropology 94(1):3-24.
Another source for Goodman et al (1994) is Hayasaka et al (1988) Mol
Biol. Evol. 5, 626-644. They looked at 998 positions and I found
(admitting for possible counting mistakes) the following putative
apomorphies within the large bodied hominoids:
Human-African apes 5
Human-chimp 4
Human-gorilla 4
Human-gorilla-orang 2
Human-chimp-orang 1
Human-orang 1
Chimp-gorilla 1
Orang-gorilla-chimp 1
The problem with this molecular study, as most others, is the lack of
outgroup comparison with only one lesser ape, five monkeys, one tarsier,
one lemur.
I ran PAUP on this data and obtained human-gorilla followed by chimp,
then orang (CI 0.6) with the following data.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Human
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Gorilla
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
Chimp
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
Orangutan
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
Outgroup
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Hayasaka et al (1988) got human-chimp, then gorilla and then orangutan.
They did a phylogeny for all the taxa, but they did not appear to posit
an outgroup. They used distance measures which as far as I understand,
just give overall similarity.
John Grehan
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list