Papilio joanae mtDNA - a reply

Stanley A. Gorodenski stanlep at
Wed Jan 31 18:31:16 EST 2001

> >Now to P. joanae.  Based on mDNA lineages, you said "This says that one
> >part of the total genome of P. joanae is a lot more like that of P.
> >machaon than P. polyxenes."  Based on my very limited understanding of
> >mDNA analysis, this argues against  P. joanae  being "Ö the most
> >primitive ancestor from which polyexenes, machaon, brevicauda, bairdii
> >all arose."
> I did say the first part about the total genome of P. joanae, but
> definitely did not say the second part. You have mixed up quotes
> somehow with someone else. There is no way that I would say that
> joanae is the most primitive ancestor from which the others arose.
> See my comments above about evolution not standing still.
I am still digesting your response, but I wanted to let you know right
now with regard to the above that I was not implying you said this,
because as you pointed out you didn't say it.  I was including responses
from other individuals in my response.  I was attempting to be less
personal so as not get anyones hair up, and so I did not want to say
"this argues against so and so's model that etc. As you pointed out,
there was no way you could have said this, and in fact I was using your
statement of what the mDNA analysis showed as evidence that P. joanae
was not likely to be the ancester of P. polyxenes. Unfortunately, I can
see now that because my response was directed to you it was easy to
interpret it the wrong way.  Sorry for the confusion on my part.  Next
time I won't hesitate to name names to avoid this kind of situation.
I will finish reading your response and will probably have more
   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

More information about the Leps-l mailing list