Forums | MacLife

I can no longer tell.

Either way, i'm always interested in new schema for classifying things.

The clade system can't enter into widespread use because it doesn't really fit.

You can have vastly different clades that have had little or no evolution and you can have very similar clades that have had quite a bit of physical divergence - and sometimes the physical divergence and the cladistic divergence doesn't match. IE you have a group that clearly is two different groups physically, yet part of one group clearly belongs to the clade of the other group.

There's also issues of one sex roaming more than the other.
IE I believe with Rosy Boas they found two distinct clades within the coastal subspecies with a distinct border - and they considered breaking up the subspecies. However, I believe further research showed that males roamed and freely bred between the clades, the females stayed put, so even though mtDNA showed 2 distinct clades, they weren't reproductively isolated from each other in the slightest and in fact had significant gene flow from males of one clade into the other, just not much maternal gene flow.

morphs/race and subspecies and clades are three different things.
Sometimes the three match up nicely, but often they don't, and we may soon get rid of the middle designation.

Of course the problem is nature doesn't really give a smurf out man made definitions.

Take the Ensatina - a classic ring species.

The moved down to California from the north, but being largely a montaine species, they forked when they hit the valley - one group going down the coast range mountains and the other down the sierra's.

When they came together again at the southern end of the valley, they coexist with each other yet are reproductively isolated. Thus they are two different species. But wait, no they aren't, because both share considerable gene flows with the populations to the north of them which when they get to the cascades share considerable gene flow each other.

Our definition of species is thus flawed because they clearly fit the criteria for distinct species yet both clearly fit the criteria for the same species as the populations to north of them in their respective ranges which clearly fit the criteria for the same species with each other where they meet in the cascades.

I don't know a better to handle it though. Cladistics isn't it - the Northern Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora) is closer to the Cascades From (Rana cascadae) then it is to the California Red-legged Frog (Rana draytonii) by cladistics, yet it doesn't hybridize with the Cascades Frog where their ranges overlap. However, it's phenotype is closer to the California Red-legged Frog (Rana draytonii) and they do hybridize (though actual gene flow is extremely limited) in the very small range overlap.

I think the reality is we really don't know jack smurf, and in 20 years, everything will be redefined again - but the reality will remain the same, they won't know jack smurf either.

Chickenhawk wrote:

I grow tired of herp references.

I grow tired of "tea bagger" references.
Deal with it.

Metacell wrote:

resedit wrote:

*animal mating stuff*

Yes, of course the taxonomic systems aren't an exact description of nature.  They're just models.  It's only to be expected that there's going to be a twilight zone around closely related animals which have semi-regular contact.  But that doesn't invalidate the use of "subspecies" as a more exact description of ONE definition of "race" as it is used to describe the Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid "races".

The last of those seems to exhibit a heavy internet presence.

I could live with that.

Pithecanthropus wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

I grow tired of herp references.

Let's talk about kitties!

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g235/ … 17729_.jpg

Man, I loves me a good lace shrouded pussy.

Chickenhawk wrote:

resedit wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

I grow tired of herp references.

I grow tired of "tea bagger" references.
Deal with it.

I wasn't aware that comments about teabaggers usually take up paragraphs and are incredibly boring.

Don't read what bores you.
Problem solved.
Now go play with your pet rocks, I'm sure they are incredibly exciting.