[Taxacom] An improved definition of cladogenesis

[Hubert Turner]

On 13/03/2010 16:48, "Kenneth Kinman" <kennethkinman at webtv.net> wrote:

> Hi Curtis, 
>             I think we are getting down to heart
> of the problem. We all seem to be in agreement that cladogensis can only
> be observed in retrospect. HOWEVER, due to the fuzziness of species
> boundaries, we cannot say that the pregnant female (or even her
> offspring) are where "cladogenesis" occurred. They could have still
> easily have potentially interbred with the original mainland
> individuals, and are therefore still just an isolated SUBspecies.  If
> the female got to the island, some of her offspring could get back to
> the mainland (even easier if we aren't talking just about islands).
Neither here nor there. What might/could/should/ought/is supposed to have
happened is irrelevant: what matters is what actually happened.
Systematics/phylogeny reconstruction is a historical science, interpreting
past events, not possibilities. If two lineages are split, they are split,
regardless of the possibility they will reunite in the future or whether
under artificial circumstances members of both lineages might/... produce
(viable, fertile) offspring.
 
Hubert