[Taxacom] Methodological plurality [was cladistic analysis for morphological characters -- UPGMA is not cladistics]

Kipling (Kip) Will kipwill at berkeley.edu
Sat Nov 17 12:13:34 CST 2012


On 11/17/2012 9:30 AM, Richard Zander wrote:
> Congruence of what?

Tree topology or more specifically sister-group relationships between 
OTUs. Viewed as a Venn or Euler diagrams it can also be thought of a 
pattern of nesting or hierarchy.

Nesting? Nesting is not a process in nature, it is a
> feature of the method. Of course nesting will be different when
> different methods are used since serial macroevolutionary
> transformations of taxa are interprested (as nesting) in different ways.
>
>

I made no claim that "nesting" was a process. Most list readers will be 
familiar with your opinions on these matters and won't be surprised we 
have trouble finding a common vocabulary. One needs to be careful not to 
confabulate patterns, processes, diachronic and synchronic context of 
phylogenies.

My post was was intended to open a discussion on the use of a plurality 
of methods and what, if any justification for this common practice exists.

kw


-- 

Contact info:

Kipling W. Will
Associate Professor/Insect Systematist
Associate Director,Essig Museum of Entomology

send specimens to:
Essig Museum of Entomology
1101 Valley Life Sciences Building, #4780
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720-4780

letter mail to:
130 Mulford Hall
ESPM Dept.- Organisms & Environment Div.
University of California
Berkeley, California 94720

fax 510-643-5438




More information about the Taxacom mailing list