Re: Molecules and Convergence [was: Re: Ailurus, the Red Cat]

["Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>]

Jon Wagner (jonathan.r.wagner@mail.utexas.edu) wrote:

<Enjoy, and rip away!>

  Absolutely not. This wasn't the point of my argument. Indeed, I do know
the probable fallibility of many molecular studies. Morphological studies
do also tend to fail in convergence problems, in that molecular does not
suffer as much. Origin of mutation as a genetic facotr which leads to
adaptation with "what you got" versus selective adaptation to "producing"
a feature for environment. Because of this, I do not take one over the
other. When working on bones, I look at bone-selected features and
effects. When working on molecules, I study genetic rates of mutation and
randomizing factors. It's a toss up in my mind. I do favor the
non-relatedness of *Ailurus* and *Ailuropoda* in that many genetic and
morphological studies find a commonality for the arrangement where the
greater panda is closest to extant ursines versus procyonids; the reverse
for the lesser panda.

  Cheers, 

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com