[Taxacom] Microspecies (was: GMOs and taxonomy)

[Richard Jensen]

Hi Ken,

Apomictic microspecies are usually recognized on the basis of some 
(often minor) consistently recognizable morphological difference. That 
is, a given microspecies is a population of morphologically uniform 
individuals that differ from other such populations. Given that 
microspecies are clones, they are by definition reproductively isolated 
from other such entities and can be viewed as species by any of various 
species concepts, e.g., biological, genetic, morphological, phenetic, 
phylogenetic.

As you note, some consider them separate species and others consider 
them variants (formae apomictae) of a single species (splitters vs. 
lumpers, respectively). The status they are accorded will depend on the 
perspective of the taxonomist dealing with them.

Cheers,

Dick J

Richard Jensen, Professor
Department of Biology
Saint Mary’s College
Notre Dame, IN 46556
Tel: 574-284-4674



Kenneth Kinman wrote:
> Hi Dick,
>       I am wondering what kind of suitable tests would you suggest for
> apomictic "microspecies"?  I suspect that many splitters (especially
> those who like a phylogenetic species concept) would call them separate
> species, while many lumpers would not.
>          -------Cheers,
>                          Ken
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Richard Jensen wrote:
>      That's why I view nomenclatural species as hypotheses - they should
> represent some real entity in nature and we should be able to
> demonstrate this by means of suitable tests of our ability to
> consistently delimit them. 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
>
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>