[Taxacom] "Tenuinucelli" clade in eudicots?

[Richard Zander]

Okay, Ken. This may be difficult to accept, but the fact that both groups have tenuinucellate ovules is evidence that both share a deep ancestor, whether they are sister groups or not. The fact is evidence that provides a theory, which can be compared with other theories, falsified maybe, supported maybe, etc. 
 
I have nothing against the methods of phylogenetics since sister group analysis is informative about similarity, which allows evolutionary explanations, e.g. closeness of evolution OR convergence, all of which are testable. It is the main principle of phylogenetics I disagree with, namely identification of a supposedly fundamental pattern in nature and mapping all other facts to that pattern, and all facts that are not congruent are discarded (epistemological extinction such as synonymy) or explained away, usually as "convergence."  [[This is a macro, thanks Curtis!]]
 
_______________________
Richard H. Zander
Missouri Botanical Garden
PO Box 299
St. Louis, MO 63166 U.S.A.
richard.zander at mobot.org
 

________________________________

From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Kenneth Kinman
Sent: Fri 2/25/2011 9:55 PM
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] "Tenuinucelli" clade in eudicots?



Hi Richard,  
       Well, you clearly did not answer my question, but just criticized
the phrasing of my question.  Okay.   So in consideration of your
criticism, I would instead ask it a little differently.  Is their any
strong evidence which supports a "theory" that the tenuinucellate ovules
of Order Cornales are synapomorphic with the tenuinucellate ovules of
euasterids?  And if so, is there any evidence supporting the theory
(reflected in Peter Stevens' APG website)  that Order Ericales is
actually closer to the euasterids than Order Cornales?        
(snip)