4 ms·

"The definition of what constitutes a species is a human construct." speciation is reproductive incompatability. geographic isolation is more like founder eff

by rolph 6mo ago

"The definition of what constitutes a species is a human construct." speciation is reproductive incompatability. geographic isolation is more like founder effect than speciation.

matt-attack 6mo ago
That sounds like bunk. Has someone really tried to get every suspiciously similar but distinct species to mate? If I go and get these two to mate are they really going to delete one of the species: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamira_oriole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamira_oriole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore_oriole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore_oriole Just Think it logically there are millions and millions of animal species alone. The number of combinations is astronomical. Did someone really try out each combination? It’s silly. Of course not.
- rolph 6mo ago
  perhaps you could explain why there is more than one type of organism on this planet.
glerk 6mo ago
> speciation is reproductive incompatability This is not necessarily true, even under a very strict definition of reproductive compatibility (offspring is itself not sterile, which excludes mules or ligers). For example, feral dogs, wolves and coyotes regularly mate and produce 100% viable offspring. You could argue that these are not really different species, but they are usually classified as such.
- rolph 6mo ago
  "For example, feral dogs, wolves and coyotes regularly mate and produce 100% viable offspring" citation required. "You could argue that these are not really different species, but they are usually classified as such." you could argue, but i not, me. reproductive compatability means wild type organisms not artificially coerced. there are tiers of incompatability, biochemical, physiological, anatomical, behavioral, geophysical, geographical. incompatability on any of those levels, drives speciation. once again speciation is not about artificial [anthropogenic] induction of reproductive function, it is about wild type incompatability. no you cant argue. but your forgiven for not having the knowledge, and being fed half knowledge out of brevity. evolution is real, speciation is real, saying let it be so, and it will manifest itself, is not real. oh by the way, we are a species of primate, not dust, and rib bones.
  - glerk 6mo ago
    > oh by the way, we are a species of primate, not dust, and rib bones. Fascinating. Not sure what gave you the idea I don’t believe in evolution or that I’m somehow promoting biblical creationism? Are you responding to the right comment? > speciation is not about artificial [anthropogenic] induction of reproductive function, it is about wild type incompatability. Neither coyotes nor wolves were created by human selection as far as I know. Dogs were. You can take dogs out of the equation if you want. Coyote/wolf hybrids (coywolves) exist in the wild and challenge your definition. And I am talking about your original comment's definition "speciation is reproductive incompatibility", because I believe you backtracked a bit with the more vague "wild type incompatibility". Besides, I don’t necessarily disagree that wolves, dogs and coyotes should be seen as the same “species”. I find this obsession with taxonomy completely useless and irrelevant. We all know there are biological clusters and the boundaries are fuzzy, but we can use simplified/imprecise models when communicating because it is more convenient. > citation required https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf
    - rolph 6mo ago
      biological levels of organization. hierachy of incompatabilities at each level of organization. wild type [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_type https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_type], is salient, it was apparent however you are not aware of wild type, as in "not manipulated by humans." a product of alleles in naturally occuring environmental context. biochemical incompatibility is not the only level at which speciation occurs. also relative frequencies are considered. when highest frequency of mating occurs between, wolves, and wolf coyote is an outlier, low frequency gene flow you are looking at the equilibrium between species separation and hybrid backcrossing. there is a lot of in jargon, wrt science, thus if you dont understand right away, and someone leads you through a rabbit hole, you will hear a bunch of jargon popping up as if bullshit. but thats what happens when you dive in with out a primer. keep talking to biologists of differing fields and you will eventually understand the extent of brevity that occurs so as to avoid reiterating facts as basic as up and down or black and white. biochemical, physiological, anatomical, behavioral, geophysical, geographical. these are tiers of biological organization, and are interdependant. gene mismatch, climate intolerance, mechanical union, stimulus/response, physical inaccessability, intraversable distance. these are the speciation drivers that occur at these levels, respectively. its not a digital phenomenon, its a statistical equilibrum, that is forced to occupy a new central tendency, as a result of environmental influence. if you need more help regarding speciation it exists.

by rolph 6mo ago

"The definition of what constitutes a species is a human construct." speciation is reproductive incompatability. geographic isolation is more like founder effect than speciation.

matt-attack 6mo ago

That sounds like bunk. Has someone really tried to get every suspiciously similar but distinct species to mate? If I go and get these two to mate are they really going to delete one of the species: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamira_oriole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamira_oriole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore_oriole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore_oriole Just Think it logically there are millions and millions of animal species alone. The number of combinations is astronomical. Did someone really try out each combination? It’s silly. Of course not.

rolph 6mo ago
perhaps you could explain why there is more than one type of organism on this planet.

glerk 6mo ago

> speciation is reproductive incompatability This is not necessarily true, even under a very strict definition of reproductive compatibility (offspring is itself not sterile, which excludes mules or ligers). For example, feral dogs, wolves and coyotes regularly mate and produce 100% viable offspring. You could argue that these are not really different species, but they are usually classified as such.

rolph 6mo ago
"For example, feral dogs, wolves and coyotes regularly mate and produce 100% viable offspring" citation required. "You could argue that these are not really different species, but they are usually classified as such." you could argue, but i not, me. reproductive compatability means wild type organisms not artificially coerced. there are tiers of incompatability, biochemical, physiological, anatomical, behavioral, geophysical, geographical. incompatability on any of those levels, drives speciation. once again speciation is not about artificial [anthropogenic] induction of reproductive function, it is about wild type incompatability. no you cant argue. but your forgiven for not having the knowledge, and being fed half knowledge out of brevity. evolution is real, speciation is real, saying let it be so, and it will manifest itself, is not real. oh by the way, we are a species of primate, not dust, and rib bones.
- glerk 6mo ago
  > oh by the way, we are a species of primate, not dust, and rib bones. Fascinating. Not sure what gave you the idea I don’t believe in evolution or that I’m somehow promoting biblical creationism? Are you responding to the right comment? > speciation is not about artificial [anthropogenic] induction of reproductive function, it is about wild type incompatability. Neither coyotes nor wolves were created by human selection as far as I know. Dogs were. You can take dogs out of the equation if you want. Coyote/wolf hybrids (coywolves) exist in the wild and challenge your definition. And I am talking about your original comment's definition "speciation is reproductive incompatibility", because I believe you backtracked a bit with the more vague "wild type incompatibility". Besides, I don’t necessarily disagree that wolves, dogs and coyotes should be seen as the same “species”. I find this obsession with taxonomy completely useless and irrelevant. We all know there are biological clusters and the boundaries are fuzzy, but we can use simplified/imprecise models when communicating because it is more convenient. > citation required https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coywolf
  - rolph 6mo ago
    biological levels of organization. hierachy of incompatabilities at each level of organization. wild type [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_type https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_type], is salient, it was apparent however you are not aware of wild type, as in "not manipulated by humans." a product of alleles in naturally occuring environmental context. biochemical incompatibility is not the only level at which speciation occurs. also relative frequencies are considered. when highest frequency of mating occurs between, wolves, and wolf coyote is an outlier, low frequency gene flow you are looking at the equilibrium between species separation and hybrid backcrossing. there is a lot of in jargon, wrt science, thus if you dont understand right away, and someone leads you through a rabbit hole, you will hear a bunch of jargon popping up as if bullshit. but thats what happens when you dive in with out a primer. keep talking to biologists of differing fields and you will eventually understand the extent of brevity that occurs so as to avoid reiterating facts as basic as up and down or black and white. biochemical, physiological, anatomical, behavioral, geophysical, geographical. these are tiers of biological organization, and are interdependant. gene mismatch, climate intolerance, mechanical union, stimulus/response, physical inaccessability, intraversable distance. these are the speciation drivers that occur at these levels, respectively. its not a digital phenomenon, its a statistical equilibrum, that is forced to occupy a new central tendency, as a result of environmental influence. if you need more help regarding speciation it exists.