Click on the link in post #19
Danny
Danny
squamata said:I don't think you can really judge by looks of these animals,the paper is based on dna analysis,it is not uncommon in the reptile world for one species too adapt itself too a slightly different environment,be it either appearence or behaviour,but if all the different animals throughout the range can be linked back than it is one species.
I don't see this nothion as being far fetched.look at for example the eastern box turtle,it has a very large range and it my state alone it lives in several different habitats,its shell colorations and patterns can differ throughout its range,i find them in dry areas,swampy meadowlands,dense woodlands,open grasslands,bogs.and several can look very unique when compared too other specimens.so are they different subspecies?or is it one species adapted too live in different habitats?
onarock said:Mark, do they know the % of genetic difference between the 5?
Balboa said:Good points on redfoots and russians.
The whole concept of sub-species is a major headache, just look at greeks, which is why I think a large part of science wants to abandon the whole practice. We're trying to differentiate critters and put nature in our clean little black and white organizational system when nature just doesn't play by those rules.
The "old-fashioned" defining practice of species has a much stronger test. If two critters can mate and produce viable off-spring (able to reproduce itself) its a species. If the off-spring is non-viable (sterile) they're a common genus. Nice and simple and substantiable. Beyond that you get into gray areas that you're trying to polarize.
I've had an innate resistance to the cherry-head are a sub-species so need to be maintained as such idea. Its similar to the western hermans and pardalis deal. Identifying these as sub-species gives scientific credibilty to maintaining them as "pure" lines, which creates a market for them due to rarity. This tends to de-value the "waste-basket" of all other members of the species, some of which may represent unique populations as well.
Scientifically they're all the same; a hermans is a hermans, redfoot is a redfoot, russian is a russian.
If the benefactors of a species wish to promote the maintenance of breeds representing geographical variation in the species, all the power to them. Preserve the diversity of nature. Just realize this may well fall more into the realm of human vanity than reality. A tortoise could likely care less where its parents came from, just as I could care less that I'm a mutt, with blended lines from all over Europe and outside as well. I appreciate that genetic diversity embodied in me.
Terry Allan Hall said:I tend to agree w/ your observations, but remember that controversy recently over the concept of "Designer tort6oises"?
Saloli said:if you can direct me to the info from Collins if not a contact for him thanks
Balboa said:Terry Allan Hall said:I tend to agree w/ your observations, but remember that controversy recently over the concept of "Designer tort6oises"?
Trust me, that was keenly on my mind and has been ever since.