Posted on 09/18/2015 8:28:31 PM PDT by JimSEA
A first draft of the "tree of life" for the roughly 2.3 million named species of animals, plants, fungi and microbes -- from platypuses to puffballs -- has been released.
A collaborative effort among eleven institutions, the tree depicts the relationships among living things as they diverged from one another over time, tracing back to the beginning of life on Earth more than 3.5 billion years ago.
Tens of thousands of smaller trees have been published over the years for select branches of the tree of life -- some containing upwards of 100,000 species -- but this is the first time those results have been combined into a single tree that encompasses all of life. The end result is a digital resource that available free online for anyone to use or edit, much like a "Wikipedia" for evolutionary trees.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
the available file must be monumentally large..
I’d think so!!!
I located the Link to download the file....but at 2 million entries.....though better of doing so as they dont state....what size the file weighs in at.
a 200 gigbyte file might be more that I really Need at the moment. not being a botanist...and all
So, this tree is based on both DNA and characteristics binning?
They'll tax a taxonomy in a heartbeat.
"Ceterum censeo 0bama esse delendam."
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Not really controversial.
I assume this is based on genomic sequences.
“the tree depicts the relationships among living things...” presumably based on genomic homologies. Not controversial, based on hard biochemistry.
“... as they diverged from one another over time...” This would be controversial, if any of it is, as it is assumption.
Not controversial to me, particularly since it is open to reasonable editing and controversy. But I’m sure you know there a lots of people that will contest even the base premises of the project. It’s a long way beyond “kinds” if you will.
Vegetation was the same until people started experimenting with it.
GENESIS 1:11-12
11 Then God said, “Let the land sprout with vegetation—every sort of seed-bearing plant, and trees that grow seed-bearing fruit. These seeds will then produce the kinds of plants and trees from which they came.” And that is what happened. 12 The land produced vegetation—all sorts of seed-bearing plants, and trees with seed-bearing fruit. Their seeds produced plants and trees of the same kind. And God saw that it was good.
JAMES 3:12
Does a fig tree produce olives, or a grapevine produce figs? No, and you can’t draw fresh water from a salty spring.
“But I’m sure you know there a lots of people that will contest even the base premises of the project.”
The basic premise that every organism has a genomic structure that can be compared to others?
“So, this tree is based on both DNA and characteristics binning?”
That’s a good question and I would assume only the former.
From a quick read of the art. it seems that not all 2.x species have been sequenced. Thus it would be a tough tree meld. Great Concept though.
“From a quick read of the art. it seems that not all 2.x species have been sequenced.”
Probably only a small percent.
Vegetation changed when prompted by environmental changed just like everything else.
“I assume this is based on genomic sequences.”
You assume wrong. Only an EXTREMELY tiny percentage of the total species have been sequenced, and for those that have been sequenced, and for those that have been sequenced, looking at just their DNA, it’s not possible to draw so-called tree-of-life relationships. If anything, the DNA genomic information contradicts the whole idea of the so-called tree of life.
Environmental changes happen, but a species will stay within a species unless it is artificially manipulated.
Not based on DNA. Only an EXTREMELY tiny percentage of the total species have been sequenced, and for those that have been sequenced, and for those that have been sequenced, looking at just their DNA, it’s not possible to draw so-called tree-of-life relationships. If anything, the DNA genomic information contradicts the whole idea of the so-called tree of life.
DNA does seem Conundrumatic as more is explored.
Do you know it is not based on genomic structure?
“If anything, the DNA genomic information contradicts the whole idea of the so-called tree of life.”
How so?
If it can be edited by anyone, it isn’t based on DNA.
I would have thought they would have at least required the taxonomic author to help resolve discrepancies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.