Boloria frigga or friggin bologna

[James Kruse]

I'm going to play a little, no offense in particular to Ron, but I'd like
him to clarify the first part.

on 11/20/01 1:44 PM, Ron Gatrelle at gatrelle at tils-ttr.org wrote:

> For example, let's say for argument's sake that most North American Colias
> just happened to look alike to humans in natural light.  (snip) 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.

Yes, true for both of these in spirit, but I am not sure what you are
suggesting. Name them on a hunch without any human perceived evidence and
hope someone finds a solidly dependable character to separate them? Sounds
kinda candle-lit and mystical.
 
> Since so many have abandoned subspecies, it is no
> wonder that they now seem to be lumping the species too.

I think that in most cases subspecies probably represent clinal variation.
Individuals within a population are sometimes more variable than individuals
between populations in several accepted subspecies. Additionally the
"boundary lines" between subspecies often lay in uncollected territory. In
the rest of the cases that do not lend themselves to the above, I ask, if it
is so distinct why not name it a new species? Indeed, workers in butterflies
stand in stark contrast against the rest of systematic zoology on the point
of subspecies.

To my mind, _more_ evidence is needed to name a subspecies than a species,
but to many workers the opposite seems true. No morphology, no ecology, no
rearing, no biogeography, no populational/comparative anything. It just has
that extra special kind of sheen. A little habitat destruction here, a
little global warming there, a little more or less habitat where there
wasn't before or breeding due to increased ease of breeder movement, and
poof! The reddish-orange speck on the wings of one, and the yellowish-orange
speck on the other, become an orangish speck and the cline breaks down.

Because I think that subspecies are (generally) not very useful, since you
typically need to know where they are from to know what they are, does not
mean that I want to lump species. In fact, I wouldn't lump a subspecies
unless I had the kind of evidence that I think is necessary to make the
decision to raise it in the first place.
 
James J. Kruse, Ph.D.
Curator of Entomology
University of Alaska Museum
907 Yukon Drive
Fairbanks, AK, USA 99775-6960
tel 907.474.5579
fax 907.474.1987
http://www.uaf.edu/museum/ento



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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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