[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


<<<In ornithology behaviors as well as parasites, waxy secretions, 
biogeographic range, and other things are used instead of anatomy and 
genetics to figure relations.>>>

<<I hope not, since one of the basic assumptions of any algorithm-based 
approach to phylogeny is that the characters are heritable.>>

They are not used in algorithms.  Parasites can be a very good marker 
for phylogeny because many only live off of one particular species, 
genus, tribe, family, and/or order.  Many types of ticks only live off 
of certain species of hawks.  Waxy uropygial secretions are almost like 
genetics.  Biogeographic range is not something that I adhere to 
strongly, but you can define a certain group by their environment varily 

Please note that I myself do not think that these methods are as relible 
as determining relations from anantomy or genetics, but rather few them 
as supporting evidence for a hypothesis.

Matt Troutman

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com