[editor-surveyor]

Specie, as you define it is simply not a reasonable nor scientific term. You have very subjectively, arbitrarily, and capriciously chosen a parameter of cross reproduction that is not necessary for “replenishment” of the ‘kind.’

Perhaps it was God’s will that cross reproduction be limited. I can think of several possible reasons, preservation of the ‘artistic’ quality of fur patterns being the one that came immediately to mind.

[D-fendr]

You can use the precise scientific definition of specie if you wish. I don't see how it changes my post.

You have very subjectively, arbitrarily, and capriciously chosen a parameter of cross reproduction that is not necessary for “replenishment” of the ‘kind.’

I believe a more precise description of the term specie will solve this. And I didn't choose it capriciously.

We're looking at what successfully mates and reproduces. I believe this is the intent and the letter of the biological science term "specie".

If your analysis supports a different taxonomy, which would it be?

[D-fendr]

Here's the species, natural science textbook description:

"groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations, which are reproductively isolated from other such groups"

Here's the idiomatic or common use definition:

Idiom:
in specie
1. In coin.
2. In a similar manner; in kind: repaid the offense in specie.
3. Law In the same kind or shape; as specified.