Re: Hello (posted for Andrew Dalby)

From
Date
Reply-To
From: adalby@ccs.carleton.ca (Andrew Dalby)
Subject: Re: Hello (posted for C. Pretzman)
To: paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 14:25:14 EST
Status: O

Determining Evolutionary/Phylogenetic Relationships...

        I believe that rRNA (ribosomal RNA) studies should be done
while temporarily ignoring comparative morphology.  This is in order
that you avoid biasing your conclusions (as you termed it, "bad
science").  rRNA will, in my opinion, cause a revolution in
determining phylogenetic relationships because is it a much more
precise tool than "they're related because they all look the same anyway".
        But do not abandon comparative morphology completely!  It
still has an important function.  How would you, for example, examine
the relatedness of rRNA from, say, Cambrian trilobites or graptolites?
This isn't Jurassic Park!
        I forsee an international project for rRNA data collection and
analysis done on a similar scale to the human genome project.  This
will form an important palaeontological database for the use of
biologists, palaeontologists, etc.
        Jump on the bandwagon, everybody!

Andrew Dalby
Carleton U
Ottawa