# phylogeny



## Rikki (Mar 27, 2007)

can we talk about that in here too?


----------



## paulh (Sep 19, 2007)

Seems to me that phylogeny fits here better than in most of the other forums.


----------



## Rikki (Mar 27, 2007)

thats what i thought, but no one really chats about that kind of stuff on here


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

What do you fancy chatting about? Got a question/hypothesis to discuss, or are you checking for future reference?
Looking forward to a good ponder!

Cheers

Andy


----------



## Tehanu (Nov 12, 2006)

I'm all ears!


----------



## Rikki (Mar 27, 2007)

see, ive got nothing to ask now, but it would be something fun and refreshing to talk about on here rather than the usual morph genetics! But while we're at it, are phylogeneticists just like taxonomists? In that they keep messing around with widely accepted structures to keep themselves in a job??


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

Saedcantas said:


> I'm all ears!


Hi Lotte, didn't know you were here too! Have you seen my reply to your Dominica thread on LF? I still haven't managed to scan the other pics, but I'm working on it!

Cheers

Andy


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

Rikki said:


> see, ive got nothing to ask now, but it would be something fun and refreshing to talk about on here rather than the usual morph genetics! But while we're at it, are phylogeneticists just like taxonomists? In that they keep messing around with widely accepted structures to keep themselves in a job??


 
Surely that's what all scientists do, by definition? If we didn't "mess around with widely accepted structures" then no new ideas would ever occur. Darwin and Wallace would have accepted that God made the world an everything in it as it is now, Newton wouldn't have cared why apples fall out of trees and Einstein would be perfectly happy that time is a fixed constant.

Bending evidence to fit 'widely accepted structures' (or central dogmas) is the habit of theologists ('fossils were put there by the creator' (implying that their all powerful God is out to deliberately decieve). Constructing theories based on available evidence and then altering the theories as new/different evidence becomes available is the preserve of the scientist.

Am I wrong?...


Cheers

Andy


----------



## Rikki (Mar 27, 2007)

bothrops said:


> Surely that's what all scientists do, by definition? If we didn't "mess around with widely accepted structures" then no new ideas would ever occur. Darwin and Wallace would have accepted that God made the world an everything in it as it is now, Newton wouldn't have cared why apples fall out of trees and Einstein would be perfectly happy that time is a fixed constant.
> 
> Bending evidence to fit 'widely accepted structures' (or central dogmas) is the habit of theologists ('fossils were put there by the creator' (implying that their all powerful God is out to deliberately decieve). Constructing theories based on available evidence and then altering the theories as new/different evidence becomes available is the preserve of the scientist.
> 
> ...


No you're right! I think it's the the ideal way to progress, but it's hard to keep up with them! Phyloegenetics / ecogenetics is where i want to head with my career, so i have no bad words to say about the field, just wanted a bit of a debate!:Na_Na_Na_Na:


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

Absolutely! Thought I'd to opened up the debate! (esp. with the slight reference to the 'bigger questions'!).

Still, yes it is almost impossible to keep up with the taxonomists, eco and pylogeneticists etc. I think the safest way to do it is to find a niche and become the best, then filter your info down through the journals and into the more public friendly communications. When I was doing my phylogeny/genetics/taxonomy/phylogeographical research I had terrible trouble keeping up with the literature! (That might be one if the reasons I failed to write up the PhD in the end)


Cheers

Andy


----------



## Rikki (Mar 27, 2007)

bothrops said:


> Absolutely! Thought I'd to opened up the debate! (esp. with the slight reference to the 'bigger questions'!).
> 
> Still, yes it is almost impossible to keep up with the taxonomists, eco and pylogeneticists etc. I think the safest way to do it is to find a niche and become the best, then filter your info down through the journals and into the more public friendly communications. When I was doing my phylogeny/genetics/taxonomy/phylogeographical research I had terrible trouble keeping up with the literature! (That might be one if the reasons I failed to write up the PhD in the end)
> 
> ...


what did you study?? it's weird but i love reading through the most dense papers i can find! a while off my PhD yet though!


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

BSc Zoology, MSc Ecology, PhD on phylogeny, phylogeography and sexual selection based on UV colouration of caribbean anoles, specifically _A. oculatus_ of Dominica and _A. richardii_ and _A. aeneus_ of Grenada.

Unfortunately due to personal reasons, I failed to write up the PhD fully. Would love to go back at some point with more focus and a better idea of a 'story' now I have more perspective.

Currently I'm a science teacher in a secondary school teaching science to 11-16 year olds ( or at least trying to!) and biology A level (16-18).

I read everything I can, but without the uni facilities, an Athens password or time (due to work) I find it impossible to keep up these days!

What stage are you currently at?

Cheers

Andy


----------



## Rikki (Mar 27, 2007)

that's rather impressive! I'm in my first year of my BSc Animal conservation science, but i'm hoping to do an MSc in conservation genetics / ecology, then PhD! If there's ever a paper you need, i can always see if i can access it through my athens? i think i've got almost every worthwhile snake related paper JSTOR and Blackwell synergy have to offer!: victory:


----------



## miffikins (Feb 25, 2007)

So this is where the clever people hang out! I never come on this part of the forum as I'm not right into morphs, then I saw this thread :lol2: 

I'm in my final year BSc Zoology and am doin MSc Animal Behaviour or Biodiversity and Conservation or Behaviour and Evolutionary Ecology, not 100% decided yet! Would love to do my PhD (if I can get funding) on social behaviour in reptiles and its evolution but I'm also really interested in phylogeny, espcially in the big re-jig thats goin on with reptiles, particularly with some of the australian varanids. My problem is I'm terrible at genetics, oh dear....

: victory:


----------

