Re: Object lesson in email bloat (Modified by John Wilkins)

From: John Wilkins (j.wilkins1@uq.edu.au)
Date: Wed 27 Apr 2005 - 12:28:50 GMT

  • Next message: Trehinp@aol.com: "Re: Emigrant culture change less than parent culture (was: Christianity Redux?)"

    Tsk, a biologist should be able to identify an ape :-)

    I am familiar with Otte and Endler, and most of the later stuff (not speciation, although I'm remedying that now - I tend to be a pluralist, allowing for sympatric as well as allopatric speciation). I also know White's karyotypic (stasipatric) account.

    I have a history - a memetic study you might say - of species concepts from Aristotle, through the late classical, medieval, renaissance, and later periods as well as the beginnings of natural history from Cesalpino on. It's being revised for publication now. I hope to have it ready by October or so.

    I am not familiar with an "inclusive species concept" unless you mean Templeton's *cohesion* concept.

    Cheers

    On 27/04/2005, at 7:55 PM, Chris Taylor wrote:

    > Hiya. The marvellous not-so-little book in which that concept, plus
    > the classical biological concept and a couple of others are descibed
    > (in a piece by Alan Templeton) is:
    >
    > Otte, D. and J.A. Endler (editors). 1989. Speciation and its
    > Consequences. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass. 670pp
    >
    > Well worth a browse -- as I recall more or less all the pieces were
    > interesting, including some good stuff on Aussie crickets (but
    > intriguingly, not Aussie cricketers) that extended the notion of
    > parapatric speciation. I'm struggling now though -- its a long time
    > since I had a copy to hand.
    >
    > Fyi my interest started with an undergraduate dissertation on
    > speciation and ended up being a Ph.D. I can forward either if you like
    > (for the various references rather than the, er, quality of the
    > writing, especially in the undergrad dissertation...). But I was more
    > focused on speciation mechanisms than species concepts (although
    > obviously one has to pick a concept to study the mechanisms). Btw nice
    > monkey ;)
    >
    > Cheers, Chris.
    >
    >
    > Chris Taylor wrote:
    >>> ...
    >>> There is also a community of people that are trying to keep Latin up
    >>> to date! This is a weird thing that may have no direct analogue in
    >>> animal biology as funny animal hybrids can't walk / eat / think as a
    >>> rule; but perhaps plants can throw us a bone here so to speak? The
    >>> notion of a defined species in plants is much less useful as there
    >>> tend to be gradations between apparent 'species' that bridge gaps
    >>> either through interleaving (ho ho ho) of bits of genomes keeping n
    >>> = 2 or whatever, or just adding genomes (hexaploid bread wheat,
    >>> maize etc.); hence the biological species definition is less useful
    >>> and we have to look at the inclusive species concept or something
    >>> like that. And importantly the hybrids can represent a species in
    >>> themselves. Something you kind of see in animal ring species but
    >>> only in a limited way, and certainly you don't see summation of
    >>> genomes in animals if there is even a sniff of recombination
    >>> (phasmids do it, but not much else? Scott help me out here as you
    >>> may be the most widely-read guy in the world...).
    >> Chris
    >> Can you give me some reference to this "inclusive species concept"?
    >> Species concepts is my thesis topic, presently being revised for
    >> publication, and I have never come across it. Your help would be
    >> appreciated.
    >> John
    >
    > --
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    > Chris Taylor (christ@ebi.ac.uk)
    > HUPO PSI: GPS -- psidev.sf.net
    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >
    >

    -- 
    John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
    University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
    "Darwin's theory has no more to do with philosophy than any other
    hypothesis in natural science." Tractatus 4.1122
    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 27 Apr 2005 - 12:42:07 GMT