5 ms·

No, neanderthals are scientifically considered a different species from homo sapiens. It's not uncommon for two related but different species to be capable of

No, neanderthals are scientifically considered a different species from homo sapiens. It's not uncommon for two related but different species to be capable of interbreeding with viable offspring. That doesn't detract from distinct speciation.

samatman 7y ago
This was, perhaps is, a topic of vigorous debate. You will find in various sources, the names homo sapiens neanderthalensis and homo neanderthalensis, it would appear Wikipedia prefers the latter, which is of course conclusive. What a species is, exactly, is the biggest spook in biology.
nradov 7y ago
In the case of such closely related populations the distinction is rather meaningless. We're arguing over semantics, not genetics. Calling Neanderthals a different species doesn't change what happened.
Mikeb85 7y ago
Dunno, one of the commonly accepted definitions of species is the largest group of organisms that can produce fertile offspring. Using this definition, Neanderthals, Sapiens, Denisovans, etc..., are definitely the same species. And if they're not the same species, it presents an interesting problem, as it would mean many humans today aren't 100% the same 'species'...
- throwawaymath 7y ago
  As a counterpoint that would imply wolves, coyote and dogs, donkeys and horses, lions and tigers, house cats and bobcats, grizzly bears and polar bears, etc. are all the same species, because they are all capable of interbreeding with viable offspring. Taxonomy is not a settled question, and I'm not trying to imply it is. But neanderthals exhibited significantly different traits from humans. There is probably a case to be made that modern homo sapiens are a subspecies of neanderthals and another hominid. Hybridization can (and frequently does) result in new species distinct from the forebear species, after many generations. But speciation doesn't preclude interbreeding.

samatman 7y ago

This was, perhaps is, a topic of vigorous debate. You will find in various sources, the names homo sapiens neanderthalensis and homo neanderthalensis, it would appear Wikipedia prefers the latter, which is of course conclusive. What a species is, exactly, is the biggest spook in biology.

nradov 7y ago

In the case of such closely related populations the distinction is rather meaningless. We're arguing over semantics, not genetics. Calling Neanderthals a different species doesn't change what happened.

Mikeb85 7y ago

Dunno, one of the commonly accepted definitions of species is the largest group of organisms that can produce fertile offspring. Using this definition, Neanderthals, Sapiens, Denisovans, etc..., are definitely the same species. And if they're not the same species, it presents an interesting problem, as it would mean many humans today aren't 100% the same 'species'...

throwawaymath 7y ago
As a counterpoint that would imply wolves, coyote and dogs, donkeys and horses, lions and tigers, house cats and bobcats, grizzly bears and polar bears, etc. are all the same species, because they are all capable of interbreeding with viable offspring. Taxonomy is not a settled question, and I'm not trying to imply it is. But neanderthals exhibited significantly different traits from humans. There is probably a case to be made that modern homo sapiens are a subspecies of neanderthals and another hominid. Hybridization can (and frequently does) result in new species distinct from the forebear species, after many generations. But speciation doesn't preclude interbreeding.