jackson@utzoo.UUCP (Don Jackson) (10/30/87)
mcardle@utzoo.UUCP (Mike McArdle) writes: >>Are these classifications and their associated divergence times based >>on phenetic or phylogenetic analyses? Do both methods provide similar >>classifications? while wcalvin@well.UUCP (William Calvin) replies: >Evolutionary trees have traditionally been constructed on the basis of >comparative anatomy; since 1963, we've had molecular clocks of various >sorts, and the betting is that comparisons of DNA sequences will be much >more definitive. See Roger Lewin's news article in last week's SCIENCE >for a good rundown. It appears to me that wcalvin@well missed the point of mcardle@utzoo's question. He was not asking about the difference in the choice of data (i.e. morphometric and meristic versus genetic) but rather the choice of methodology in analyzing the data. The choice between a phylogenetic and a phenetic analysis may lead to dramatically different classifications even though the same data may be used. Certainly any good cladist will explain in detail the important differences between the methods and the "enlightenment" which follows the phylogenetic path. -- Name: Don Jackson Mail: Dept. Zoology, Univ. Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1A1 UUCP: {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!jackson