[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: emu history
Nick Pharris wrote:
A slight wrinkle here. Based on mitochondrial DNA, Cooper et al. 2001
409: 704-7) actually found Kiwis closer to emus/cassowaries than to moas.
I'd be very cautious about using the results of mitochondrial genomic
studies to override anatomy-based phylogenies. I'm not saying that the
analysis done by Cooper and friends is wrong. What I am saying is that that
not all phylogenetic analyses based on mitochondrial DNA (including those
based on COMPLETE mitochondrial genomes) are necessarily correct. Some
mitochondrial-based phylogenetic analyses have produced some pretty
wacked-out topologies - like putting passerines at the base of the
Neornithes (Harlid et al., 1998). Phylogenetic analyses using complete
mitochondrial genomes cannot always be relied upon to generate the 'correct'
tree. Every dataset has its own intrinsic problems that throw a spanner in
the phylogenetic works, and mitochondrial DNA is no exception.
Learn how to choose, serve, and enjoy wine at Wine @ MSN.