I would say that to most scientists, genetic based phylogenies that match morphological based phylogenies are much less interesting than phylogenies that do not match those predicted by morphology.

Exactly my point. And beyond that it is hard to publish a study that shows that the moleculer tree is 100% concordant with the morphological tree. That's not "exciting" science and not worth the space in a big journal.
Therefore there is a perception that molecular phylogenetics is throwing all of our morphological phylogenies out the window. That is simply not the case. Clearly there are cases where that has happened, but there are just as many cases I suspect where the phylogenies are concordant.

And we got here from a discussion of striping in sandboas?
-----
Chris Harrison
San Antonio, Texas

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]