GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268416337
From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:52:17 -0500
So, Ken's "Jewish clades" and "Christian clades" monophyletic, I presume based
on his assertion that clades are defined by their "demographic properties," not
their "tags" (genetic mutations). Ooookay.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Vincent Vizachero
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 12:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
> Though Ken clearly needs no defense from off-target attacks, let's
> not butcher history.
> If anyone has been using a sloppy definition of "clade" I don't know
> who that could be. Whenever I've seen Ken use the word
> "clade", that word has represented a monophyletic group.
> On Mar 12, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote:
> > Yes, the word "clade" has both a lay definition, meaning simply
> > "group," and a technical definition, as used in cladistics,
> > meaning a *monophyletic* group. The Y-DNA haplotree is a
> > cladogram, a product of cladistic analysis. Its branches are,
> > to the best of our current knowledge, monophyletic clades. In
> > these discussions, we should be using the technical definition of
> > the word. The word "group" is still available for other uses.
|Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA by "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>|