tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1871542942842750523.post4214771392870850833..comments2023-07-24T10:40:57.739-04:00Comments on dechronization: A method that fails . . . or why can’t we all just get along?Glorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17707197225963721646noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1871542942842750523.post-28255852604969355282009-03-30T14:03:00.000-04:002009-03-30T14:03:00.000-04:00What a great title for the Graur and Martin articl...What a great <A HREF="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TCY-4B7N7M2-4&_user=10&_coverDate=02%2F29%2F2004&_alid=893195885&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=5183&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=1&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=f373e987515064462aea6a1236839ddc" REL="nofollow">title</A> for the Graur and Martin article though.Liam Revellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04314686830842384151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1871542942842750523.post-7038500174947564822009-03-29T23:07:00.000-04:002009-03-29T23:07:00.000-04:00In my view the Graur and Martin article was over t...In my view the Graur and Martin article was over the top, to the point of being unprofessional. They certainly got their point across, and good for them if they racked up some citations, but I'm not a fan.<BR/><BR/>I'm not going to argue in favor of NCA because I've never been comfortable with the method (in spite of learning it from Templeton and later helping him teach it as a TA for his course in population genetics). That said, I think some of the criticisms are unfair. As Dan's subsequent post points out, there are also problems a-plenty with mainstream population genetic methods when it comes to inferring history. <BR/><BR/>The whole situation was best summarized for me by Monty Slatkin at the end of a seminar I saw him give at UC Davis a number of years ago. He recalled how theorists a decade ago had promised new dimensions of historical population genetic inference, if only the data were available. Now that the data are available, however, he admitted that some historical problems may be too complicated to ever be accurately retraced.<BR/><BR/>Although only time will tell, it seems likely that this limitation will apply to many of the questions that interest us most.Glorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17707197225963721646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1871542942842750523.post-32704384468859177712009-03-29T20:25:00.000-04:002009-03-29T20:25:00.000-04:00You've posed the question of whether these heated ...You've posed the question of whether these heated exchanges are good or bad. This reminds me of what might be the gold standard of understated vitriol - the Graur and Martin <A HREF="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14746989" REL="nofollow">Trends in Genetics</A> article on molecular clocks (2004). I thought when that article came out that perhaps it would be perceived as an ad hominem attack and thus be less effective in making its point. However, it has been cited nearly 200 times and is probably one of the most recognized articles on the subject published in the past 5 years. Something to think about....Dan Raboskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10771030521328260748noreply@blogger.com