Re: Sibley and Ahlquist (long)

[John Penhallurick <>]

I agree with Simon that most people are used to a list based on our best 
knowledge of phylogeny, and that they would give thumbs down to an 
alphabetical list.  I can remember how confusing I found Cayley's 
habitat-based sequence.

I also agree that there is still a lot of work to be done.  One universal 
problem with lists is that they force into two dimensions a tree which is 
necessarily multidimensional.

I personally think that Sibley & Monroe is the best to date and prefer to 
use that.  Don't forget that S & M supported the traditional 
classification 80%.

John Penhallurick
=================================================