[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