Species concepts (and subspecies)

[Bill Cornelius]

Alright I confess: I object to subspecies, species too for that matter,
genera is ok but it sounds weird, order sounds military & makes you wonder
about how those old guys got financed to do their research. Phyla is ok
because nothing else comes close & kingdom sounds medieval, we do need some
new names, & should start over from the top.
Bill

OLIVER JEFFREY CATLIN wrote:

> Is there really any objection to the existence to subspecies? I don't
> think anyone could deny that there are definite 'varieties' or 'races' of
> species that are consistently more similar to one another than they are to
> other members of the species. Two (more) examples are Lycaeides idas anna
> and Lycaena xanthoides dione. Most everyone can recognize these two
> things to subspecies right away.
>
> However, the biological meaning of 'subspecies' seems to be in contention,
> at the very least because formal subspecies definitions are few and far
> between. Not to mention the difficulty with species definitions!
>
> It all comes back to the human need to name EVERYTHING. I don't think
> it's a negative quality, we just run into trouble when we try to
> standardize things...
>
> Jeff Oliver
> jeffrey.oliver at colorado.edu
> 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>  http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> 


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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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