Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Definition of 'Species' Could Aid Species Identification
PhysOrg.com ^ | 23 August 2006 | Staff

Posted on 08/24/2006 6:54:24 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 last
To: RightWhale
They will probably redefine race as well.

Is the 400 metres going to be the 400 Metre Sprint?

81 posted on 08/24/2006 8:04:46 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
My guess is that this new definition would, for example, divide a ring species into a few separate species, notwithstanding that at a newly-defined species' boundary, it is capable of cross-boundary interbreeding.

Interesting, but I'm not sure it answers my question. I still don't see how you can have genetic isolation without reproductive isolation.

I have another question if you don't mind. If species are defined by the dynamics of populations, then what defines a population.

82 posted on 08/24/2006 8:35:25 PM PDT by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.
"It's still a matter of them as can't interbreed are different species, just a better way to determine "can't interbreed""

Just to pick nits, it is 'don't interbreed' not 'can't interbreed'. Your definition doesn't consider parapatric or sympatric speciation.

83 posted on 08/24/2006 9:08:29 PM PDT by b_sharp (Why bother with a tagline? Even they eventually wear out! (Second Law of Taglines))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp
Maybe I'm missing something.

Them as can't produce fertile offspring are of different species (normal, healthy, mature etc. specimens).

Them as can but don't is up for grabs so lumpers, splitters and PhD candidates have a way to pass the time.

At least that's my take pending a better speciation spectroscope.
84 posted on 08/25/2006 8:41:41 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

It's a sprint already. Used to be a distance race years ago. You won't die, but you'll think you might.


85 posted on 08/25/2006 8:47:12 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp

Thought of this too late:

I'm personally very much in favor of species "complex" designations, especially for sedentary critters with high variablity.


86 posted on 08/25/2006 8:47:14 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

This bastardization of science only aids the agenda driven crowd.
This garbage definition of species will now be used to make a wide range of claims for "endangered species".


87 posted on 08/25/2006 8:51:40 AM PDT by G Larry (Only strict constructionists on the Supreme Court!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.
"Them as can't produce fertile offspring are of different species (normal, healthy, mature etc. specimens)."

If cessation of gene flow is the criterion then those that cannot are no different than those that will not. Not recognizing another as a potential breeding partner will prevent a hybrid population almost as well as infertile hybrids will.

By your criterion, the separation of male Lion and female Tiger as separate species would be more difficult. Female Ligers are frequently fertile.

My opinion is that a species definition needs to be more relaxed than an inability to produce fertile hybrids. The following is from a Philosopher of Science who's doctoral thesis/dissertation was on speciation and is currently writing a book on the subject.

Speciation, in sexual organisms anyway, occurs when two genetic groups no longer intersperse by interbreeding. This can happen in the following ways.

1. Instantaneous speciation. This tends to occur mainly in plants through hybridisation or a duplication of the number of chromosomes at conception. Hybrids will have asymmetric chromosomes to begin with but a process of doubling and lack of secondary reduction through meiosis (or the formation of haploid, or half complement of chromosome-containing, cells). So, when you get a hybrid, the chromosomes of the two parent forms don't match up, but if you then double the chromosomes and don't halve them again, you can pair them up. In the case of duplication of one species' chromosomes, you end up with a 2n (or 3n or 4n...) set of already paired chromosomes.

Sometimes these polyploids, as they are called (many-numbered), are able to reproduce by selfing, or the polyploid is a common enough event that there are two or more individuals that can cross, and away you go. Secondary selection eliminates genes that are less fit.

2. Allopatric speciation. A bit of terminology to begin with - "patris" means "country" or "homeland". It comes in flavours ranging from "sym" (together) through "peri" (next to) to "allo" (separate). So allopatric speciation is "speciation that happens when the populations are isolated geographically". We'll encounter some other patrises later.

In allopatric speciation, a species' range is divided, say, by a river or mountain range or desert or currents in the ocean, etc. Once this happens, they are adapting to novel conditions and also a process of more or less random (stochastic) processes of sampling the genetic variants leads to a population that is rather different from the parental one. The stochastic process is called "random genetic drift". Although reproductive infertility or isolation is not something that selection "aims for", it is often a byproduct of changes made to the developmental cycle of the isolate population. So, when the two get back in sympatry, they either can't interbreed (are isolated) or they can but the hybrids are not as fit as either of the parental variants (lowered hybrid fitness), and so they are then subjected to "reinforcing selection" to maintain isolation. [Of course they may just end up going extinct as well, due to lowered fitness.]

3. Peripatric speciation. In this case the isolated population is not entirely genetically isolated, but because it is on the periphery of the main population, a local population (caled a "deme") may have unusual genetic variants (called alleles") that get established for a mix of selective and drift reasons to the point where hybrids between them and the main population are less fit, causing reinforcing selection. This occurs because the rate of interdeme crossing is lower than the rate of intrademe crossing, and so it is able under certain conditions to form novel genotypes and developmental sequences. [Technical note: when the rate of migration between populations is less than 50%, it is parapatry. When the geographical isolation is less than 100% it is peripatry. So para- and peri-patry can be the state of the same population. This is a nusiance piece of confusing terminology.]

4. Sympatric speciation. This is controversial (and was Darwin's preferred view). In this view, a variant form reaches a new "adaptive peak", and reinforcing selection selects against hybrids with the prior form. This is thought to happen in a couple of ways. One is through the evolution of novel mating systems, such as calls (the case of the electric signalling fishes, for example; the classical case is the mating calls of Rana pipiens). Another way is through the adaptation to a new host, such as when Rhagoletis fruitflies started breeding on apple trees in California, which flower at a different time of year, causing selection to isolate the older hawthorn-breeding developmental cycle from the newer apple-breeding developmental cycle. This is sometimes called "host-race" speciation.

5. Statsipatric speciation (in-place). This is like the instantaneous case above, although the chromosomal variants are able to interbreed with the original chromosome count individuals. Selection takes the form of inviable developmental cycles.

6. Introgression. In this case a population of, say, flowering plants, is able to cross with some other species, but the progeny aren't thereby members of a new species, but backbreed into the population, changing its genetic constitution and adaptive niche so that when it is in sympatry with the original species, the population is now isolated.

Speciation studies focus a lot on "reproductive isolating mechanisms" (RIMs) which are the particular mechanisms that keep populations from sharing their genes. These are either a byproduct of evolution (say, in allopatry), or are secondarily subjected to selection (in peripatry), or are the direct result of selection (in sympatry).

There are also cases of speciation being caused by parasites. A parasitic cell called Wollbachia can infect the sex cells of arthropods (insects etc.) so that uninfected individuals, though themselves genetically identical, cannot interbreed with infected ones. In this case the infection acts like a kind of allopatry, even if they are in the same home region, allowing the genes to evolve incidentally in their own way through drift and selection.

_____________________

A hybrid is the combination of two independent lineages, irrespective of fertility. The technical term for an infertile hybrid is "mule".

This means that hybridism occurs within species (say, between haplotypes), as well as between species. In the latter case there can be complete infertility, mostly infertility, partial infertility, or only a lowered rate of crossbreeding. Basically if you take it to be the rate of gene flow, it can run from 0% to ->%50.

The RIM account of the biospecies concept only refers to a lowered rate of successful hybridism.

The species themselves are often well defined, so we think, only to find (as in tigers and lions) that they not only *can* successfully reproduce, but that the hybrid can be stronger or bigger than the parental forms. So the final question is why the species don't merge - geographical isolation and possible lowered ecological fitness might explain it.

John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project University of Queensland

"Them as can but don't is up for grabs so lumpers, splitters and PhD candidates have a way to pass the time."

Given the difficulty of differentiating closely related species/subspecies I fear there will always be lumpers and splitters.

88 posted on 08/25/2006 10:38:29 AM PDT by b_sharp (Why bother with a tagline? Even they eventually wear out! (Second Law of Taglines))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

Placemarker.


89 posted on 08/25/2006 6:52:33 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Everything is blasphemy to somebody.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson