[Taxacom] Molecular data in mycology/systematics
Robinwbruce at aol.com
Robinwbruce at aol.com
Mon May 6 05:28:48 CDT 2013
2013
Is it too late to go back to Haeckel's antithesis and choose the other
neologism of his making as the basis of our classifications. What would
ontogenetic systematics look like? I think it might well be more biological and
less ideological, and pondering phylogenetic inference, why-questions and
the like would disperse like the morning mist through sunlight breaking
through..................one can but dream.
Robin
In a message dated 5/4/2013 1:42:29 A.M. GMT Daylight Time,
kfitzhugh at nhm.org writes:
The paper refers to an often-stated issue that has intrigued me for a
while, "it is widely accepted that [maximum likelihood & Bayesianism]
are better able to correct for spurious effects caused by long-branch
attraction, which is a problem of major concern in phylogenetic inference."
If one knows /a priori/ that their observation statements of shared
similarities are in fact not shared similarities, then wouldn't the
solution be to rename those characters as different prior to inferring
phylogenetic hypotheses, rather than implementing an algorithm that
assumes not-similarity for observations one claims are shared
similarities? It goes to the matter that if cladograms are explanatory
vehicles, then they are answers to particular why-questions, and
why-questions regarding shared similarities presume the truth of those
observations.
Kirk
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Kirk Fitzhugh, Ph.D.
Curator of Polychaetes
Invertebrate Zoology Section
Research & Collections Branch
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
900 Exposition Blvd
Los Angeles CA 90007
Phone: 213-763-3233
FAX: 213-746-2999
e-mail: kfitzhug at nhm.org
http://www.nhm.org/site/research-collections/polychaetous-annelids
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On 5/3/2013 4:29 PM, Henrik Nilsson wrote:
> Dear Taxacom readers,
>
> We just published an introduction to the use of molecular data in fungal
systematics and taxonomy. In the article we also take the opportunity to
discuss some of the challenges that systematics/taxonomy face at present.
>
> Hyde et al. 2013. Incorporating molecular data in fungal systematics: a
guide for aspiring researchers. Current Research in Applied & Environmental
Mycology 3: 1-32.
>
> Open access: http://www.creamjournal.org/vol-3-issue1.php#article1
>
> Although the focus is on fungi, much of the text is general in nature as
to apply, we feel, to systematics/taxonomy at large.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Henrik Nilsson
>
> --
>
> http://www2.dpes.gu.se/staff/hennil/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:
(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
(2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list