Ben Woodcroft (2015-07-05 07:52 +0300) wrote: > On 27/06/15 22:33, Ben Woodcroft wrote: >> To me this is problematic in two ways: >> 1. It works on more than just genomes >> 2. There is some contention in the field about the use of >> "prokaryote", since this refers to a paraphyletic group - us humans >> are more closely related to Archaea than Bacteria. >> http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-642-30194-0_114 >> >> I figure it was just easier to sidestep the issue and put Archaea and >> Bacteria. > Perhaps I bored everyone, but is the patch a-ok now?
I've tried it and it has been built successfully, and I think it's absolutely OK. I have not pushed it though as Ricardo is a Master of bioinformatics, perhaps he'll notice something I didn't. -- Alex
