Any thoughts out there as to what benefit there may be to resistance
in some fields (oh, let's say, systematics) to enquiry using methodology
and practice which originated in that field to pursue evidence for
questions from other fields? Am I sampling a bias section of the
systematic community? I think we all know the value of, say, systematics
to pharmaceuticals,but why the tension when a paleoecologist or ecologist
would like to infer historical evidence from a phylogeny, and so would
like to produce that phylogeny using modern (molecular) characters?
