 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Contact Sales! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by troy h on November 26, 2002 at 08:50:39:
In Reply to: more importantly.... posted by vvvddd on November 25, 2002 at 17:42:16:
his clades may in fact have some validity . . . certainly, based on the DNA data that he used they do (how many genes did he examine???). however, work by Wiens & Reeder, for example, has demonstrated that a combined molecular and morphological (i.e. whole organism data set) approach is better at revealing true pattern of relationships (phylogenies are hypotheses of these patterns). so, on his clades, i'll reserve my opinions until more data is forthcoming. however, his "species" are (as i've said before) nonsense.
troy
