In article <32195115.7240 at vims.edu>, Mark Siddall <mes at vims.edu> writes:
> Ron Kagan wrote:
>>>> For those of you who have used maximum likelihood analysis (DNAML and
>> DNAMLK of Felsenstein's Phylip package): What level of significance do
>> you use for the likelihood ratio between the log likelihoods w and w/o
>> the molecular clock, to reject the null hypothesis of the molecular
>> clock? Is p<0.05 still the standard, or should I use a stricter criteria
>> (p<0.01)?
>> Sorry?!!
> Since when is the molecular clock a reasonable null hypothesis?!!!
>
Since the early 1960s.
Des Higgins
> Molecular phylogenetics in the late 20th century... limited by the
> arbitrariness of Joe Felsenstein's imagination and Linus Pauling's
> presumptions???
>> [no offense Joe... ].
>> Mark
