tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post227949149390744322..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: PZ's Radical Tree of LifeLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-36119728999441051162010-06-29T21:30:10.258-04:002010-06-29T21:30:10.258-04:00iTOL, the Interactive Tree of Life, might be more ...<a href="http://itol.embl.de/itol.cgi" rel="nofollow">iTOL, the Interactive Tree of Life</a>, might be more to your taste. I came across it while looking for a good way to display my <a href="http://severinghaus.org/static/tmp/cladr.html" rel="nofollow">Flickr tree of life</a>.<br /><br />-SteveHorsePunchKidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16740155121930238326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-54270780991210919912010-06-22T08:12:18.373-04:002010-06-22T08:12:18.373-04:00In my defense, I specifically explained that it wa...In my defense, I specifically explained that it was a tree biased to overrepresent animals.<br /><br />I used it to make two points: that we're all related, and that all extant species are equally "evolved" -- the circularity is nice because it makes it easier to make the point that no one species is at the head of the table.PZ Myershttp://scienceblogs.com/pharyngulanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-14062630674811481572010-06-21T08:58:37.290-04:002010-06-21T08:58:37.290-04:00The Eisen tree is better, although I would quibble...The Eisen tree is better, although I would quibble with the representation of Excavates on the Eukaryotic side of things.<br /><br />As for the three domain hypothesis, I mostly agree with you Larry, although deciding exactly what to draw instead if a little problematic. I do personally lean towards the Eukaryotes emerging from within the Archea myself, making Archea a non-monophyletic group.-DGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16018033631187602248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-14997144016202119372010-06-20T22:06:49.917-04:002010-06-20T22:06:49.917-04:00Well,
What about we make a mess of this entry and...Well,<br /><br />What about we make a mess of this entry and start by asking how much horizontal gene transfer messes the tree up. Then talk about the 1% tree of life by Bork, then go to Ford Doolittle and, perhaps, Gogarten, to refute that a tree is possible, visit Koonin's forest of life that, in some respect, seemed to give hope to "tree huggers so to speak" (as Koonin put it), and then we note that we might not be able to reach a conclusion, or maybe not even agree on many thing, except that no tree should give humans much more importance than deserved.<br /><br />Best,<br /> --GaboAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-57317766255807564932010-06-20T14:17:37.836-04:002010-06-20T14:17:37.836-04:00The radial (not radical) tree from the Hillis lab ...The radial (not radical) tree from the Hillis lab (not original to PZ as he makes clear) has the virtue of presenting extant species as being equally evolved-- there is no implication of 'higher' or 'lower' life forms. The Eisen tree implicitly perpetuates that misconception by placing eukaryotic branches at the top. I agree entirely with Larry that the Hillis tree gives grievously short shrift to the diversity of microbial species relative to that of macroscopic lineages.Arabifloranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-81782268715831173112010-06-20T13:56:49.765-04:002010-06-20T13:56:49.765-04:00@Carl,
I like the one from Jonathan Eisen except ...@Carl,<br /><br />I like the one from Jonathan Eisen except for the fact that it emphasizes the Three Domain Hypothesis. Personally, I don't think Archaea should be elevated to domain status and I don't think that Archaea and Eukaryotes share a common ancestor that evolved later than other prokaryotes. <br /><br />It does put the animals in their proper place, however and for that reason it's much better than PZ's.<br /><br>Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-83296745132278341942010-06-20T12:37:08.138-04:002010-06-20T12:37:08.138-04:00I found another one that might be good.
The Image
...I found another one that might be good.<br /><a href="http://www.embl.de/aboutus/communication_outreach/media_relations/2006/060302_heidelberg/press02mar06pic.jpg" rel="nofollow">The Image</a><br /><a href="http://www.embl.de/aboutus/communication_outreach/media_relations/2006/060302_heidelberg/index.html" rel="nofollow">Link to source</a>Venehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04252114756864644059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-5976031429009201962010-06-20T11:56:01.488-04:002010-06-20T11:56:01.488-04:00It seems likely, to me at least, that the radical ...It seems likely, to me at least, that the radical in the label Radical Tree of Life is related to this:<br />"The number of species represented is approximately the square-root of the number of species thought to exist on Earth"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-56818313643315082102010-06-20T11:45:42.098-04:002010-06-20T11:45:42.098-04:00How about this one, from Jonathan Eisen?How about <a href="http://evolution-textbook.org/content/free/figures/00END_EVOW_Art/02_EVOW_END.jpg" rel="nofollow">this one</a>, from Jonathan Eisen?Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03829168960578664919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-8969708853246997952010-06-20T11:44:30.704-04:002010-06-20T11:44:30.704-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03829168960578664919noreply@blogger.com