Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

defining phylogenetic relationships: DNA analysis vs morphological analysis.

  • 24-09-2011 6:43pm
    #1
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭


    From looking at morphological similarities we previously assigned the whale to the order cetacea but from looking at dna and molecular analysis we can now say that the hippopotamus might be the whale's closest living relative. The hippo and other even toed ungulates (cattle, pigs, sheep ect) belong to the order artiodactyla and the whale belongs to the order cetacea but there is talk of merging the two orders into a new order, Cetartiodactyla!

    Will DNA based phylogenetic trees completely get rid of phylogenetic trees based on morphology and what other animals will we discover that are or are not closely related to to DNA analysis?


Comments

  • #2
    Mickeroo
    Administrators, Computer Games Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 32,394 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Mickeroo


    Does this include toothed whales and balean whales or one or the other??


  • #3
    Sid_Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,720 ✭✭✭Sid_Justice


    Morphological based phylogenetic trees can offer insights genetic phylogenetic trees cannot and vice-versa.

    From a eco-evolutionary point of view we're interested in how phenotypes change in response to the environments, they tell us a great story. If we were to look at poodles and wolves we may not be overwhelmed by genetic differences but looking at changes in phenotype we see there are many things going on.

    From a genetic-evolutionary point of view we don't want to be too biased / fooled by superficial morphological similarities nor over look close relationships (cetacean and artiodactyls ) due to gross morphological dissimilarity.

    there's been decades of work using morpho trees, maybe their use is less relevant because all the work has already been done. as genetic ones are so new and as analysis becomes so much cheaper and faster (e.g. in china) there is more scope to bring new information to light.

    Genetics is not the panacea for explaining and understanding evolution imo.

    It's been a while since I've looked at anything like this, so my terminology is probably way off. I interviewed for a phylogenetics phd once, no wonder i didn't get it :o:o


  • #4
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Mickeroo wrote: »
    Does this include toothed whales and balean whales or one or the other??

    Both baleen whales and toothed whales share a common ancestor and share and order (Odontceti, the toothed whales and Mysticeti, the baleen whales are both sub orders of cetacea) so as far as I know it would since the order cetacea in its entirety are being merged with the order artiodactyla.


Advertisement