Re: phylogenetic reconstruction

Arthur V. Chadwick (chadwicka@swau.edu)
Tue, 07 Dec 1999 09:43:11 -0800

At 08:37 AM 12/07/1999 EST, Huxter wrote:
>"Phylogenetic analyses of 144 separate loci reproduce almost exactly the
>known genealogical relationships among these 24 strains "
>
>Science 1994 Apr 29;264(5159):671-7
>Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies.
>Hillis DM, Huelsenbeck JP, Cunningham CW
>"The performance of methods of phylogenetic analysis can be assessed by
>numerical simulation studies and by the experimental evolution of organisms
>in controlled laboratory situations. Both kinds of assessment indicate that
>existing methods are effective at estimating phylogenies over a wide range
of
>evolutionary conditions, especially if information about substitution bias
is
>used to provide differential weightings for character transformations. "
>
>
>There are many others. Don't make the illogical mistake of taking a
>particular circumstance and extrapolating it as a field-wide weakness.

That is exactly what you have done. You are talking about organisms that
are and are known to be related. I am talking about conjectural
relationships that have been posited on the basis of phylogenetic
constructs. In my case they don't work. In your case they do. No
surprises there. My proposal stands.
Art
http://geology.swau.edu