[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Genetics and Morphology Collide
In a message dated 96-02-09 17:04:48 EST, firstname.lastname@example.org (King, Norm)
>Of course, there is always the danger that synapomorphies used in
>constructing cladograms actually do not have phylogenetic significance.
This sentence contains a common but interesting misusage of the term
"synapomorphy." Synapomorphies _cannot_ lack phylogenetic significance; only
apomorphies can. Synapomorphies are not used _to construct_ cladograms; only
apomorphies are. The synapomorphies emerge from among the apomorphies in the
analysis _after_ the cladogram is constructed: they are precisely the
apomorphies _with_ phylogenetic significance!
Another lesson in cladistic terminological nit-picking by your humble
Holder of the title of Most Messages Posted to the Dinosaur List (and the
only poster to attain a four-digit total!).
Hey--Nick Pharris and I and a few others keep this list sizzling!