> However, in this article, I show that female-mediated sperm selection can also facilitate assortative fusion between genetically compatible gametes. Based on

> However, in this article, I show that female-mediated sperm selection can also facilitate assortative fusion between genetically compatible gametes. Based on this evidence, I argue that reproductive failure does not necessarily exclusively represent a pathological condition, but can also result from sexual selection (‘mate choice’) at the level of the gametes. I'm haphazardly suggesting that the above is the same as: > "There are some (small) genetic populations whose genetics diverged so much, from geographic separation, that they have fertility problems [1]. We have genetic populations that are the result of geographic separation, and we even have genetic divergence that makes reproduction difficult/impossible. Again, what's left? Why can't we categorize human genetic populations to the same level? Please be specific in what's missing? > It says nothing about species or subspecies Why would it? If the categorization of humans included subspecies, I couldn't have responded.