Re:Combined answer 1: cladistics

[SeanSt8579@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/1/04 5:27:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
david.marjanovic@gmx.at writes:

<< Obviously it doesn't have a monopoly on accuracy -- or if it does, we can't
 find that out, because to do so we'd have to compare cladograms to The True
 Tree. But... what other scientific methods are there for phylogenetic
 reconstruction? I know none. >>

Have you seen those studies (for example, Atchely & Fitch 1991, Hillis et al, 
1992) where trees generated via cladistics were matched up with known 
phylogenies?

Of the 135,135 possible trees in Hillis et al, all five methods under 
consideration (parsimony, Fitch-Margoliash, Cavalli-Sforza, neighbor-joining, 
unweighted pair-group) predicted the true phylogeny.

Seems pretty darn accurate in those cases, at least!

-Sean

Apologies to David for originally sending this just to him. 
Must...remember..to change..address...