[Taxacom] cladistic analysis for morphological characters
dochterland at telenet.be
Sat Nov 10 16:49:03 CST 2012
It is often stated that it is best to have about three times more morphological characters than taxa, but that is not an absolute necessity. As soon as you have about twice as many characters than taxa, as in your case, the matrix is worth a try. Much depends on the ratio between binary and multistate characters, the way characters are scored and whether you use a weighting scheme, such as implied weighting, or not. I just finished an analysis on 42 taxa and 82 morphological characters and obtained a consensus of nine trees with a consistency index of 0.648, while Sanderson & Donoghue (1989) Evolution 42: 1781-1795 predict a ci of 0.351 for such a data set. So give it a try, and when it does not work out properly, do what Kluge said: go back to the data and check all your scores.
Best regards and success,
> Dear All
> I have 81 morphological characters for 44 species. it is right to make a cladistic analysis for them. If it is ok which program I can use it.On the other hand I did UPGMA .
> Many Thanks in advance
> All the best.
> Sami Rabei
> With my Best Wishes
> Sami Hussein Rabei, Ph.D.
> Botany Department
> Faculty of Science,
> Damietta University
> New Damietta , Post Box 34517
> Egypt .
> Tel. Mobile: 002 0127 3601618
> Tel. Work: 002 057 2403981
> Tel. Home: 002 057 2403108
> Fax: 002 057 2403868
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
> (2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
More information about the Taxacom