|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
1 CNRS UMR 5143, MNHN Département Histoire de la Terre, 75005 Paris, France. ncao{at}snv.jussieu.fr
2 CNRS UMR 7179, Collège de France, UPMC Univ. Paris VI, 75005 Paris, France
3 CNRS UMR 5143, UPMC Univ. Paris VI, MNHN Département Histoire de la Terre, 75005 Paris, France. Tel: 01 40 79 80 53. Email: rene.zaragueta-bagils{at}upmc.fr
Using a biogeographical example, we show that the strict consensus of parsimony programs fails to summarize the information present in the initial hypotheses of homology. The intersection tree used in the three-item analysis program Nelson05 maximizes the compatibility of the three-item statements deduced from the source trees. The 3ia solution is more precise than the parsimony one because it accurately summarizes the initial information.
Key Words: Three-item analysis Intersection tree Historical biogeography Strict consensus Parsimony
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |