Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Three-taxon statement analysis (3TA) and standard cladistic analysis (SCA) were evaluated relative to propositions of taxic homology. There are definite distinctions between complement relation homologs and paired homologs. The complement relation is discussed, relative to rooting, parsimony, and taxic propositions of homology. The complement relation, as implemented in SCA, makes sense only because SCA is a simple evolutionary model of character-state transformation. 3TA is a method for implementing complement relation data from a taxic perspective. The standard approach to cladistic analysis distinguishes taxa by rooting a tree, which means that that approach is incompatible with taxic propositions of homology, because a taxic homology is a hypothesis of relationship between taxa that possess a homolog relative to taxa that lack a homolog. It is not necessary to treat paired homologs from a transformational perspective to distinguish informative from uninformative data. 3TA yields results markedly different from those of SCA. SCA, which seeks to minimize tree length, may not maximize the relation of homology (congruence) relative to a tree.

Type

Journal article

Journal

Syst Biol

Publication Date

09/2000

Volume

49

Pages

480 - 500

Keywords

Base Sequence, Biological Evolution, Classification, Models, Biological, Reproducibility of Results, Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid