-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Cryptic in genetics
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 07:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Pedro Cordeiro Estrela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Dear Pablo,
The example you are trying to find is in fact difficult because few
systematist who use different
criteria to define species will recognize a species (as a biological
entity) based on
morphological difference if genetic markers say the contrary. You
probably already read it, but
Kevin de Queiroz articles on species concepts and criteria are specially
enlightening (see bibtex
files at the end of the e-mail).
One noteworthy exception is when specific character divergence produces
reproductive isolation.
You might look into the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup for some
examples on the evolution of
genitalia. You might also look at the Ensatina complex. Although these
salamanders are recognized
as subspecies they are morphologically distinct.
hope it helped!
pedro
@INBOOK{Queiroz1998,
chapter = {5: The general Lineage Concept of Species, Species
Criteria, and
the Process of Speciation},
pages = {57-75},
title = {Endless Forms: species and speciation},
publisher = {Oxford University Press},
year = {1998},
editor = {Daniel J. Howard and Stewart H. Berlocher},
author = {de Queiroz, Kevin},
address = {New York, Oxford},
}
@ARTICLE{Queiroz2005,
author = {Kevin de Queiroz},
title = {Ernst Mayr and the modern concept of species.},
journal = {Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A},
year = {2005},
volume = {102 Suppl 1},
pages = {6600--6607},
month = {May},
abstract = {Ernst Mayr played a central role in the establishment of
the general
concept of species as metapopulation lineages, and he is the author
of one of the most popular of the numerous alternative definitions
of the species category. Reconciliation of incompatible species
definitions
and the development of a unified species concept require rejecting
the interpretation of various contingent properties of metapopulation
lineages, including intrinsic reproductive isolation in Mayr's
definition,
as necessary properties of species. On the other hand, the general
concept of species as metapopulation lineages advocated by Mayr forms
the foundation of this reconciliation, which follows from a corollary
of that concept also advocated by Mayr: the proposition that the
species is a fundamental category of biological organization. Although
the general metapopulation lineage species concept and Mayr's popular
species definition are commonly confused under the name "the biological
species concept," they are more or less clearly distinguished in
Mayr's early writings on the subject. Virtually all modern concepts
and definitions of the species category, not only those that require
intrinsic reproductive isolation, are to be considered biological
according to the criterion proposed by Mayr. Definitions of the species
category that identify a particular contingent property of
metapopulation
lineages (including intrinsic reproductive isolation) as a necessary
property of species reduce the number of metapopulation lineages
that are to be recognized taxonomically as species, but they cause
conflicts among alternative species definitions and compromise the
status of the species as a basic category of biological organization.},
doi = {10.1073/pnas.0502030102},
keywords = {Animals; Classification; Evolution; Models, Biological;
Species Specificity},
pii = {0502030102},
pmid = {15851674},
timestamp = {2007.07.09},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0502030102}
}
--- morphmet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Cryptic in genetics
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 15:41:45 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: morphmet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dear colleagues,
Besides the problem behind species concepts and aesthetic
(non-scientific) values for particular kinds of phylogenetic and
taxonomic characters, I am currently searching for published examples
where the species is cryptic from the genetic perspective but
recognizable (different) from the morphological perspective. This is a
counter-current example which is apparently very difficult to find.
An interesting example is the evidence presented by Jeffrey Schwartz on
his book: "The Red Ape: Orangutans and Human Origins" where he contests
current genetic evidence upon the common origin shared by chimps and
humans, arguing instead for the orangutan.
I will appreciate any published studies suggesting morphological
evidence for species lineage independence (i.e. species) opposing
genetic evidence of single lineages (genetically cryptic).
Thanks
Pablo
Pablo Jarrin
Ph. D. candidate
Dept. of Biology / Boston University
M. A. Ecology Behavior and Evolution
Boston Univ.
Director
Yasuni Research Station
Escuela de Ciencias Biol�gicas
Pont. Univ. Cat�lica del Ecuador.
--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org
_______________________________________________________
Pedro Cordeiro Estrela
Dr.Sc.
Departamento de Genetica - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Campus do Vale - Bloco III
Av. Bento Gon�alves, 9500 - Agronomia
Porto Alegre, RS 91501-970 / Caixa Postal 15.053
Brasil.
TEL: +55 (51) 3308.6726
(cod. Porto Alegre)
________________________________________________________
--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org
