Re: Re: HIST: TB: Pink Opal- use of species designation

I'm Ok with calling long haired dashunds wolves, but we need to be aware they are not typical wolves.  They have been bred seperately about 2,000 generations.  But even so, their DNA is indeed little changed.
Pink Opal is not a typical I. pallida, but close to average I. pallida.  A few color modifiers, and few shpe modifiers, but the DNA is still basicly I. pallida.  Of course, there may have been an outcross a few generations back,  we con't know.  Same with iris found in the wild.
There is no hard and fast way to designate when something stops being a given species, short of a known outcross.  Selection and mutation soes eventually make a species divide.  But there generally isn't a given generation where a taxonomist can point to and say "That is when the species seperated."  Exceptions include a polyploiy event, a chromosome inversion or transolation and such.  But such can only be pointed to in the light of later history.  Even then, most of the time we still can't see such a point.
Walter

irischapman@netscape.net wrote:
While this may have all and only pallida in its ancesry I have problems
calling it a pallida.  It was hyridized in the garden, not collected in
wild and I beilive , several generations from the wild.  As soon as
plants are selected for certain characteristics we soon see things that
are different then nature.
If we used this sort of deignation then we should be calling  long
haired dashunds and  indeed all breeds of dogs , wolves, as their
genetics is 100% from wolves. And to study wolf behavior /genetics we
should use these domestic "Wolves"in our studies, no need to send
biologists into the wild, save a lot of money on resesrch that way.

Chuck Chapman

Yahoo! Personals
Let fate take it's course directly to your email.
See who's waiting for you Yahoo! Personals
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index