Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!uunet!bionet!GENETICS.WASHINGTON.EDU!joe
From: joe@GENETICS.WASHINGTON.EDU (Joe Felsenstein)
Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.evolution
Subject: Features needed in phylogeny programs
Message-ID: <9012040656.AA04002@evolution.genetics.washington.edu>
Date: 4 Dec 90 05:56:12 GMT
Sender: daemon@genbank.bio.net
Lines: 23


Thanks to many people for the useful suggestions for changes in my own
package.  I can see that there is a lot of concern about format conversion,
and I hope in my next version to allow either interleaved or sequential
format, at the user's option.    I will think about all the suggestions.

However, I was really not trying to get a discussion of features in my
package going.  I was trying to raise a more general question, without
reference to any particular package or features thereof.  So let me re-ask
the question in hopes of stimulating a more general, wide-ranging discussion:

      What features are needed in future phylogeny packages?

I am particularly interested in suggestions of kinds of analyses no one
may have thought of, kinds of questions that could be asked of data that
are not now askable in existing programs.  I am *not* trying to get lots of
postings referring to my own package.

-----
Joe Felsenstein, Dept. of Genetics, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
 Internet/ARPANet: joe@genetics.washington.edu     (IP No. 128.208.128.1)
 Bitnet/EARN:      felsenst@uwalocke
 UUCP:             ... uw-beaver!evolution.genetics!joe


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com