Turning around

[John Grehan]

Perhaps rephrase as:

 

1.      Inference, using mostly supposedly evolutionarily neutral
sequence data that are supposed to somehow track events of genetic
isolation following whatever species concept.
	
        trumps
	
	
2.      Inference using uniquely shared features as predictors of common
ancestry whether or not they are "evolutionarily adaptive" (whatever
that means).

 

Yes the earth is going to hell in a basket (primarily the fault of my
generation), and [I'll probably regret saying this] for the most part I
don't see systematics or taxonomy or bioinformatics doing much to change
that (for all the hype made out about systematics and biodiversity).

 

John Grehan

 

________________________________

From: Richard.Zander at mobot.org [mailto:Richard.Zander at mobot.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:39 PM
To: John Grehan; TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
Subject: RE: [TAXACOM] Turning around

 

 

I would rephrase "what most systematists believe" as the choice between:


1. Inference, using mostly evolutionarily neutral sequence data, of
nested sets of events of genetic isolation following the Biological
Species Concept.

is more important than, yea trumps, 

2. Inference of ancestral trees from shared morphological apparently
evolutionarily adaptive traits of organisms. 

I figure most systematists don't want anything to do with a choice of
this kind. Let the theorists fight it out, and just continue with
salvage biodiversity study. The whole earth is going to hell and there
is no money to support needed basic projects. 

Right? 

 

______________________ 
Richard H. Zander 
Bryology Group, Missouri Botanical Garden 
PO Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA 
richard.zander at mobot.org <mailto:richard.zander at mobot.org> 
Voice: 314-577-5180;  Fax: 314-577-0828 
Websites 
Bryophyte Volumes of Flora of North America: 
http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm 
Res Botanica: 
http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/index.htm 
Shipping address for UPS, etc.: 
Missouri Botanical Garden 
4344 Shaw Blvd. 
St. Louis, MO 63110 USA 

-----Original Message----- 
From: John Grehan [mailto:jgrehan at SCIENCEBUFF.ORG] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 12:23 PM 
To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU 
Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] Turning around 

I don't have any 'proven' solution to the DNA base and morphology
contradiction. 

  

There is at least reason to argue that the DNA sequence stuff is
phenetics rather than cladistics and so is as potentially misleading as
overall similarity of morphology (which also connects humans with
African apes).

  

When it comes to systematists I am hardly preaching to the choir. Most
systematists seem to believe that DNA sequences overrule contradictory
morphology. 

  

John Grehan