lamoran at medisun.med.utoronto.ca (Laurence Moran) wrote:
>There are several genes that appear to be more phylogenetically useful than
>16S RNA. One of these is the glutamine synthetase gene and dendrograms
>constructed using these sequences tend to show that Thermotoga maritima
Although I don't want to start an ideological war, what makes GS 'more phylogenetically useful' than 16S?
In my (extremely humble) opinion 16S RNA phylogeny - while certainly not perfect - is the best single predictor of phylogenetic relationships that is available.
David Faguy
Exobiology Branch
NASA/Ames Res. Ctr.
