Boloria frigga or friggin bologna

Ron Gatrelle gatrelle at tils-ttr.org
Tue Nov 20 17:44:12 EST 2001


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kondla, Norbert FOR:EX" <Norbert.Kondla at gems3.gov.bc.ca>
To: <fnkwp at aurora.alaska.edu>; <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 4:39 PM
Subject: RE: Boloria frigga


> Very helpful and interesting observations. This reminds me of the issue
of
> Beringia and the role it played in the evolution of the various organisms
> that now live on both sides of the Bering Strait. It is one thing to
> consider the option of everything that looks kinda similar from Europe to
> Labrador as being one species. It is another thing to consider the option
> that there are two species on two continents, and maybe three if one
looks
> at the disjunctions of some "species" in northern europe vs futher east
in
> Asia. But both of these interpretations may still be too simplistic due
to
> the complications of Beringia.  For all anyone knows there could be
> Beringian species that are presently treated as Beringian subspecies (eg.
> Papilio alaskensis, Glaucopsyche kurnakovi) or not even recognized at the
> subspecies level due to preconceived and unscientific notions that
dismiss
> "minor" phenotypic differences as not being important. I frequently
chuckle
> when I hear people without any apparent exertise in a group of
butterflies
> pooh-pooh a subspecies name created by someone who has developed some
> knowledge of the organism. Species as biological and evolutionary
entities
> are not defined by the scale of visual differences to our human eyes --
they
> are defined by a shared gene pool that has evolved separately from other
> organisms and there may or may not be huge visual differences as seen
> through our simple human eyes that only perceive a very small part of the
> electromagnetic spectrum. Just some more stray thoughts ---
>
For example, let's say for argument's sake that most North American Colias
just happened to look alike to humans in natural light.  And lets say that
we had still not discovered that they reflect ultraviolet ( and that that
is how they see each other).  We would be lumping several species under one
name.

Let's also say that Pterourus eurymedon was yellow and black not white and
black. (again basing "species" on human visual perception).  Now that mtDNA
studies have shown them to "be the same" (and if only knowing the dna and
visual factors) we would now say these were the same species.

There has to be a holistic understanding of each organism to reach the
"correct" conclusion.  Since so many have abandoned subspecies, it is no
wonder that they now seem to be lumping the species too.

Ron


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl 
 


More information about the Leps-l mailing list