Recent critics of distance data have argued that a molecular clock is a necessary assumption for the use of distance data in phylogenetic reconstruction. In fact, several pairwise tree-construction algorithms have been developed that make no such assumptions. When distances are additive, these algorithms efficiently recover the correct tree in spite of any rate-disparity. Furthermore, the correct tree will be unique in exhibiting a perfect-fit to a matrix of additive distances. Finally, net amounts of shared derived change can then be identified if the tree includes an unambiguous outgroup.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Springer et al. (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: