 | mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 |
| mobile - desktop |
|
|
|
News & Events:
|
|
|
[ Login ] [ User Prefs ]
[ Search Forums ] [ Back to Main Page ] [ Back to Taxonomy Discussion ] [ Reply To This Message ] [ Register to Post ] |
Posted by: dhl at Fri Apr 2 10:16:49 2004 [ Report Abuse ] [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by dhl ] but you haven't shown that any of their conclusions are wrong. Their finding were in concordance with Hedges (1986) and da Silva's (1997) findings. You suggest that "Moriarty and Cannatella should have chosen as outgroup another species that is more distantly related to the North American species of Hyla than H. chrysoscelis and Hyla andersonii." That's baloney. Choosing very distant taxa as outgroups does not polarize characters nearly as well as as closely related taxa. While their discussion of outgroup selection was lacking, they did base it on prior findings. The relationships they found within Pseudacris are fine, the question remains on the position of this clade within Hylidae. You claim Hyla chrysoscelis is most more derived, but relative to what? What's your source here? And again, the resolving power of that immunological data cannot compete with their mtDNA data. [ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ] | ||
>> Next Message: RE: Sure, it probably isn't the final word.... - CKing, Fri Apr 2 13:48:51 2004  | ||
<< Previous Message: RE: Hyla ('Pseudacris') regilla - a potential can of taxonomic worms - CKing, Fri Apr 2 02:55:42 2004 | ||
|
|
|
|
