Re: [Killietalk] RE: Species aren't always so easy to distinguish....

[Wright Huntley <whuntley at verizon_net>]

Hey Chris,

How did this EE let you biology pros sucker him into a discussion of 
genetics, anyway?

OTOH, I can understand how Diane's course at Berserkeley "spent several 
weeks just discussing the meaning of 'species'." Cal students are 
inherently slow, and seem willing to devote incredible energy to any 
topic that involves more government control of individual choices, like 
the ESA. ;-)

I went to Stanford. :-)

Wright

Chris wrote:
> Sounds like a great course.  At 36 I'm back in school collecting biology
> and chemistry prerequisites for a MST specializing in Bio.  I Just
> finished Genetics and Cell and I'm getting ready Micro and Nutrition.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: killietalk-bounces at aka_org [mailto:killietalk-bounces at aka_org] On
> Behalf Of Brown, Diane
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 2:44 PM
> To: killietalk at aka_org
> Subject: [Killietalk] RE: Species aren't always so easy to
> distinguish....
>
>
> ....true true, the DNA is not an infallible guide.....
>
> Just reminded of the "red wolf" controversy--the question being whether
> red wolves in the southwest were a true species deserving of endangered
> species act protections, or just a local cross between coyotes and gray
> wolves, and not a true species deserving any type of protection:
> despite anatomical studies and DNA work, the controversy continues....or
> at least was still raging last time I read about it.
>
> And that's assuming you can agree on the meaning of the term species.  I
> took a graduate seminar in evolutionary biology at berkeley where we
> spent several weeks just discussing the meaning of "species".
>
> --diane brown in st. louis
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:11:08 -0500
> > From: Chris <cgraseck at optonline_net>
> > Subject: RE: [Killietalk] arnoldi story
> > To: "'killifish discussion list'" <killietalk at aka_org>
>
>
> > Wright,
>
>
> > How does one differentiate between two closely related species.  I
>
> don't
>
> > believe that there is any magic number of restriction fragment length
> > polymorphisms (RFLPs) that determines species.  If there were it would
> > take all the fun out of taxonomy.  Different species have different
> > numbers of   RFLPs between them depending on how broad the gene pool of
> > that species is.
> > Some species, like ours (H. sapiens sapiens), have a very small gene
> > pool and all members are very closely related. Where as other species
> > have much broader gene pools and individuals are not as genetically
> > similar.
>
>
> > I know you are a dog person so lets use this for instance, according to
> > Coppinger, et al, it is not possible to differentiate between Dog,
>
> wolf,
>
> > Coyote, and Jackal DNA.  The line between species is too vague.  They
> > share too many genes and the distribution of genes is somewhat random
> > among the whole group.
>
>
> > I'm far from an expert on this so please correct me if I'm mistaken.
> > Actually I'm not disagreeing with your hypothesis I just don't think we
> > are at the point where we can say this male is not the same species as
> > this female when those species are very closely related.
>
>
> > Cheers,
>
>
> > Chris  
>
>
>
> To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
> Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/

--
Wright Huntley -- 760 872-3995 -- Rt. 001 Box K36, Bishop CA 93514

    "...there are only a limited number of things that government
 can do more effectively than individuals or other organizations
 can do."
     -- T. Sowell


To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/