[Previous by date - Re: defining clades/ancestors]
[Next by date - [unknown]]
[Previous by subject - Re: defining clades/ancestors]
[Next by subject - Re: eumaniraptoran systematics]
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:16:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
To: -PhyloCode Mailing List- <PhyloCode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: defining clades/ancestors
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, T. Mike Keesey wrote:
> That was the concept Nathan Wilson raised in the thread on Apomorphy-Based
> Definitions, since it is impossible, in some cases, to select one
> individual, or even a single breeding pair, as the MRCA based only on
> phylogeny. (You *could* factor in time, but, as we discussed, this is not
> relevant to phylogeny.)
An added thought: since these ancestors are specified based solely on
phylogeny, not time, should they really be called "most recent common
ancestors"? Perhaps "phyletically closest common ancestors" or
"generationally closest common ancestors" or something like that would be
more appropriate?
_____________________________________________________________________________
T. MICHAEL KEESEY
Home Page <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>
The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
personal <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
Dinosauricon-related <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
AOL Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
ICQ <77314901>
Yahoo! Messenger <Mighty Odinn>