"Good" vs "Bad" characters in phylogenetic analysis.

[Ingolf Askevold]

      I'm looking for PUBLISHED REFERENCES concerning the relative
merits of kinds of characters for phylogenetic analysis.  In
particular, I seek instances of analyses that show empirically that
one type of character is "better" than another.  For example, many
systematists maintain that genitalic characters are more reliably
informative than are characters of external structure, a premise I
maintain myself.  I suspect that such information is concealed in
the context of monographs, and is unlikely to be discovered by
conventional searches.

      I would appreciate receiving literature citations that deal
with this topic; or better yet, reprints of those (yours, maybe?)
papers so I can cite them so we can all get into Citation Classics.
Our library here is pitiful, so it's not such a simple process to
just scan a hundred journals.  So, it's not just laziness and
asking everyone to do the legwork for me...  Thanks in advance!

      Please reply to me directly, thank-you!, at the email address
indicated below.

                                        *************************************
                                        *  Dr. Ingolf S. Askevold           *
                                        *  Entomology-Biological Control    *
                                        *  Florida A & M University         *
                                        *  Tallahassee, FL  32307-2926      *
                                        *  ph 904-599-3149                  *
                                        *  fax 904-561-2221                 *
                                        *  email  iaskevol at vm.cc.famu.edu   *
                                        *************************************