[Taxacom] SUSPECT: Re: Molecules vs Morphology‏

[Richard Zander]

Can I argue here that the genome does NOT include all that is relevant to determining evolution? I suggest that the environment or habitat is a kind of metachromosome or "envirosome" that contributes both direction of evolution and stabilization over time through natural selection. It is shared by all members of a species, and by affecting traits of a genus give coherence to evolution at the genus level.

Given this, morphology is a better clue to evolution than the genome since it is at the interface of genome and environment. 

*****************************
Richard H. Zander 
Voice: 314-577-0276
Missouri Botanical Garden
PO Box 299
St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA
richard.zander at mobot.org
Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/
and http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
Non-post deliveries to:
Missouri Botanical Garden, 4344 Shaw Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63110
*****************************


-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Jason Mate
Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2009 5:38 PM
To: Taxacom
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] SUSPECT: Re: Molecules vs Morphology‏

Yes the complexity of a sequence is much less than many morphological characters, but arguing this accross assumes that morphology is more than the genome which begs the question of where this information is hidden.

Jason