RE: Species [arbitrary to a degree]

["Thomas R. Holtz, Jr." <tholtz@geol.umd.edu>]

> From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
> Waylon Rowley
>
> I'm getting into this discussion a little late, but
> why not change the definition of species to something
> like "a group of organisms which consistantly
> interbreed only in their natural environment"? I think
> that's the best we can do until future geneticists can
> pinpoint the exact percentage of genomic change that
> quantifies the definition. Agreed?
>
What you have posted is even closer to the standard Biological Species
Concept (or Criterion, to go by de Queiroz's formulation).  However, it
still doesn't work for fossils (can't test it), nor can it be tested outside
of direct field observations.  Doesn't mean it is a bad definition, just one
which is only testable in a fraction of the cases.

                Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
                Vertebrate Paleontologist
Department of Geology           Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland          College Park Scholars
                College Park, MD  20742
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/tholtz.htm
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/eltsite
Phone:  301-405-4084    Email:  tholtz@geol.umd.edu
Fax (Geol):  301-314-9661       Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796