Rudimentary organs
Nineteenth century figure found to be wrong about something, kind of
I have Google Alerts set for the term “cladistics” so I will receive a feed every time Google indexes that word. Now, in the last couple of days those feeds have catch a story circulating in the news media regarding a recently published study looking at the appendix from a comparative and phylogenetic perspective, pretty cool if you ask me.
I can only access the abstract of the original publication unfortunately, but it does seems to be a well done and thorough study. The problem is the way the report gets increasingly hyped by the news media. I first got this: Evolution of the appendix: A biological ‘remnant’ no more. OK, that’s not bad. I then got this: Appendix redux. Yeah, sure, succinct and clever. But today I got this: Darwin wrongly called the appendix a biological ‘remnant’, say researchers:
Search
Recent Comments
Tags
Blogroll
- 2D Goggles
- Ant Blog
- antbase
- Apoica
- Catalogue of Organisms
- Computer cladistics / ¡Cladística a la lata!
- Creature Cast
- Evolving Thoughts
- HAO
- Historias de hormigas
- I Love Insects
- iPhylo
- Macromite’s Blog
- Myrmecoid
- Myrmecos Blog
- myrmician
- Pharyngula
- Photo Synthesis
- SciencePunk
- Sifolinia’s AntBlog
- Systematics and Biogeography
- The Ant Room
- The Dragonfly Woman
- The Lancelet
- The Rough Guide to Evolution
- Vince Smith blogs
Links
- Abouheif Lab

- Ant Genomics

- antweb.org
- Asociación Ibérica de Mirmecología
- Biodiversity Heritage Library
- Comparative Morphology & Development (CSZ)
- filogenética.org
- formicidae.org
- International Society of Hymenopterists
- Miller Lab – Insect Systematics
- Morphbank
- MorphoBank
- Plazi
- Richard Dawkins
- Social Wasps
- Systematics Association
- TNT wiki
- Willi Hennig Society
- ZooBank




