Cladistic hypotheses

[Garland, Mark]

J. Kirk Fitzhugh wrote on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 2:39 PM:

> At 02:12 PM 11/23/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>> * and from the quote from the original exchange, it may be that the
>> cladogram _suggested_ the hypothesis, if it didn't already exist in
>> the analyst's mind as something that was being tested.
> 
> Why not consider shared similarities as the observations-as-effects
> that "suggest" the cladogram-as-hypothesis?  There is no need to add
> the superfluous layer of thinking that a cladogram suggests a
> hypothesis, when the cladogram itself is the hypothesis.   
> 
> As the mechanics of hypothesis testing require the deduction of
> potential test consequences, a conclusion of a mental inference, as a
> cladogram-as-hypothesis, cannot be tested by a
> cladogram-as-hypothesis produced by a computer.

So how do you test a cladogram?  (Naïve question, I know.)

I ask because it seems that a cladogram is the final product in many systematic studies.  I don't associate the term "hypothesis" with the thing that you end up with at the end of your study.
  

-- 
Mark A. Garland
Botany Section
Division of Plant Industry
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
P. O. Box 147100
Gainesville, Florida 32614-7100
(352) 372-3505 ext 402