Message 2002-02-0020: RE: interesting style of definition

Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:51:59 -0500 (EST)

[Previous by date - Re: interesting style of definition]
[Next by date - Re: interesting style of definition]
[Previous by subject - RE: interesting style of definition]
[Next by subject - RE: interesting style of definition]

Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:51:59 -0500 (EST)
From: "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
To: -PhyloCode Mailing List- <PhyloCode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: RE: interesting style of definition

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Bryant, Harold MAH wrote:

> I don't think that the draft PhyloCode includes a definition of "ancestor."

Not in the glossary, anyway. Nor "related" nor "crown clade".

Seems to me an example of a stem-modified crown clade would be a good
idea, too, as well as other acceptable definitions that are more complex
than the basic node-, stem-, and apomorphy-based ones.

_____________________________________________________________________________
T. MICHAEL KEESEY
 The Dinosauricon        <http://dinosauricon.com>
  BloodySteak             <http://www.bloodysteak.com>
   personal                <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
    Dinosauricon-related    <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
     AOL Instant Messenger   <Ric Blayze>
      ICQ                     <77314901>
       Yahoo! Messenger        <Mighty Odinn>


  

Feedback to <mike@indexdata.com> is welcome!