Re: Apomorphy-based definitions

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/27/02 4:37:36 PM EST, Dinogeorge@aol.com writes:

<< The point I was trying to make is that you can't always use characters to 
 find out whether a species falls above or below some split, because the 
split 
 almost always occurs independently of the acquisition of characters. >>

Let me add that since it is the characters that tell you whether you have an 
evolutionary novelty, and thus a new species, it should be the characters 
that define the taxa, not the splits.