critique of Wagner groundplan-divergence studies and a comparison with other methods of phylogenetic analysis

Wagner groundplan-divergence analysis provides a suitable method for reconstructing phylogenies given suitable criteria for determining primitive and derived characters in a series of homologous characters. Approximately half of the papers surveyed determined such polarities using an out-group criterion while the other half employed criteria that were suspect, simply incorrect or none at all. Four data sets were used to compare the Wagner groundplan-divergence method with Hennig argumentation, Wagner 78 (a computerized Wagner algorithm) and CLINCH 3 (a compatibility algorithm). Hennig argumentation and Wagner 78 performed in a similar manner as Wagner groundplan-divergence. CLINCH provided solutions that were either incomplete or incompatible with the results obtained by other methods. We conclude that compatibility analysis is not to be preferred and may be misleading.