Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 8 Feb 2021 10:08:41 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> It doesn't appear as if your review has taken you as far as the Puerto Rican Honey Bee species and the work going on there.
Sorry to be a stickler, but African bees are the same species as European bees. The usual term is subspecies, but as we know this is a slippery area. In any case, you can't tell most of them apart by looking at them. Even the DNA provides ambiguous results.
ยง
Mayr acknowledges the basic problem with diagnosability (whether in the context of the species or the subspecies category): ''Every local population is slightly different from every other local population, and the presence of these differences can be established through sufficiently sensitive measurements and statistics. It would be absurd and would lead to nomenclatural chaos if each such population were given the formal trinominal name that is customary for subspecies. Therefore, subspecies are to be named only if they differ 'taxonomically', that is, by sufficient diagnostic morphological characters" (Mayr 1969, p. 42). This introduces a level of arbitrariness, of course.
from: Zachos, F. E. (2016). Species concepts in biology (Vol. 801). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|