Summary
We rebut Penny's challenge to our claim that the evolutionary clock shows nonconstancy of rate in certain lineages, as exemplified by a comparison of the cytochromec of rattlesnake, turtle and birds, and several other vertebrates, including four mammals.
Article PDF
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Barnabas, J., Goodman, M., Moore, G.W. (1972). J. Mol. Biol. 69, 249
Fitch, W.M. (1973). J. Mol. Evol. 2, 123
Goodman, M., Moore, G., Barnabas, W., Matsuda, G. (1974). J. Mol. Evol. 3, 1
Holmquist, R. (1975). J. Mol. Evol. 4, 277
Jukes, T.H., Holmquist, R. (1972a). Sci. 177, 530
Jukes, T.H., Holmquist, R. (1972b). J. Mol. Biol. 64, 163
Penny, D. (1974). J. Mol. Evol. 3, 179
Prager, E.M., Brush, A.H., Nolan, R.A., Nakanishi, M., Wilson, A.C. (1974). J. Mol. Evol. 3, 243
Romero-Herrera, A.E., Lehmann, H., Joysey, K.A., Friday, A.E. (1973). Nature 246, 389
Stenzel, P., (1974). Nature 252, 62
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Holmquist, R., Jukes, T.H. Species-specific effects and the evolutionary clock: A reply to penny. J Mol Evol 4, 377–381 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01732539
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01732539