What is the difference between morphological homologies and molecular homologies

J Mol Biol — Nature — Q Rev Biol — Academic Press, New York, p Genetics — Evolution — Cracraft J DNA hybridization and avian phylogenetics. Plenum, New York, p In: Luckett WP ed Comparative biology and evolutionary relationships of tree shrews.

Plenum Press, New York, p Science — Doolittle RF Similar amino acid sequences: chance or common ancestry? Dover G a A role for the genome in the origin of species. In: Mechanisms of speciation. Alan R Liss, New York, p Dover G b Molecular drive: a cohesive mode of species evolution.

Dover G c A molecular drive through evolutions. Bio-Science — Dover G [Letter to the editor. Eldredge N, Cracraft J Phylogenetic patterns and the evolutionary process. Columbia University Press, New York. Faith DP Distance methods and the approximation of most-parsimonious trees. Farris JS The meaning of relationship and taxonomic procedure.

Farris JS Estimating phylogenetic trees from distance matrices. Farris JS The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis.

In: Funk VA ed Advances in cladistics, vol 2. Columbia University Press, New York, p 7. Felsenstein J Parsimon in systematics: biological and statistical issues. Annu Rev Ecol Syst — J Mol Evol — Fitch WM An improved method of testing for evolutionary homology. Fitch WM Distinguishing homologous from analogous proteins. Frankel J What are the developmental underpinnings of evolutionary changes in protozoan morphology? Ghiselin MT The distinction between similarity and homology. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ, p Ghiselin MT Narrow approaches to phylogeny: a review of nine books of cladism.

Oxford Surv Evol Biol — Goodman M, Miyamoto MM, Czelusniak J Pattern and process in vertebrate phylogeny revealed by coevolution of molecules and morphologies. In: Patterson C ed Molecules and morphology in evolution: conflict or compromise? Gould SJ The heart of terminology. Nat Hist 97 2 : 24— Hennig W Phylogenetic systematics. Universeity of Illinois Press, Urbana, pp. Mol Biol Evol 5: — Deaminated and glyoxalated deoxyribonucleic acid. Biocemistry — Inglis WG The observational basis of homology.

Inglis WG Similarity and homology. Syst Zool Jeuniaux C Principes de systematique biochimique et application a quelques problemes particulires concernant les aschelminthes, les polychetes et les tardigrades. Cah Biol Mar — Johnson LAS Rainbow's end: the quest for an optimal taxonomy. Kaplan DR The concept of homology and its central role in the elucidation of plant systematic relationships.

Columbia University Press, New York, p Lake JA Determining evolutionary distances from highly diverged nucleic acid sequences: operator metrics. J Mol Evol Mayr E Principles of systematic zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York. Taxon — Noden DM Interactions between cephalic neural crest and mesodermal populations.

John Wiley and Sons, New York, p Nolan C, Margoliash E Comparative aspects of primary structure of proteins. Annu Rev Biochem — Patterson C Morphological characters and homology.

Academic Press, London, p Patterson C Introduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 1. Patterson C Homology in classical and molecular biology.

Mol Biol Evol — Pauling L, Zuckerkandl E Chemical paleogenetics. Acta Chem Scand [Suppl] — Cell Ridley M Evolution and classification. Longman, London. Riedl R Order in living organisms. The kinds of homologous and nonhomologous relations in classical and molecular biology are explored through the three tests that may be applied to a hypothesis of homology: congruence, conjunction, and similarity.

The same three tests apply in molecular comparisons and in morphology, and in each field they differentiate eight kinds of relation. These various relations are discussed and compared. The unit or standard of comparison differs in morphology and in molecular biology; in morphology it is the adult or life cycle, but with molecules it is the haploid genome. In morphology the congruence test is decisive in separating homology and nonhomology, whereas with molecular sequence data similarity is the decisive test.

Consequences of this difference are that the boundary between homology and nonhomology is not the same in molecular biology as in morphology, that homology and synapomorphy can be equated in morphology but not in all molecular comparisons, and that there is no detected molecular equivalent of convergence.