A data matrix of 23 generic or subgeneric taxa versus 24 characters and a shorter matrix of 15 characters were analyzed by means of ordination, cluster analyses, parsimony, and compatibility methods (the last two of which are phylogenetic tree reconstruction methods) and the results were compared inter alia and with traditional methods. Various measures of fit for evaluating the parsimony methods were employed. There were few compatible characters in the data set, and much homoplasy, but most analyses separated a group based on Stylaria from the rest of the family, which could then be separated into four groups, recognized here for the first time as tribes (Naidini, Derini, Pristinini, and Chaetogastrini). There was less consistency of results within these groups. Modern methods produced results that do not conflict with traditional groupings. The Jaccard coefficient minimizes the significance of symplesiomorphy and complete linkage avoids chaining effects and corresponds to actual similarities, unlike single or average linkage methods, respectively. Ordination complements cluster analysis. The Wagner parsimony method was superior to the less flexible Camin–Sokal approach and produced better measure of fit statistics. All of the aforementioned methods contain areas susceptible to subjective decisions but, nevertheless, they lead to a complete disclosure of both the methods used and the assumptions made, and facilitate objective hypothesis testing rather than the presentation of conflicting phylogenies based on the different, undisclosed premises of manual approaches.
Comparing item parameter estimates and fit statistics of the Rasch model from three different traditions
