The post below led to a much longer back & forth, but my experience has been that many biologists & paleontologists, if pressed to give a definition of species, will say the Biological Species Concept (no fertile hybrids) or a close variant of BSC. Am I wrong? Is the BSC really in the minority? - ThreadSky

dwbapst.bsky.social • 71 days ago

The post below led to a much longer back & forth, but my experience has been that many biologists & paleontologists, if pressed to give a definition of species, will say the Biological Species Concept (no fertile hybrids) or a close variant of BSC. Am I wrong? Is the BSC really in the minority?

Reposted from Dr Douglass S Rovinsky

Yeah, the BSC was already thrown out in what, the early ‘80s?

I don’t know why people still talk about it.

Comments

stairwaytokevin.bsky.social•71 days ago

I always feel like an outlier when I articulate something like the general lineage or phylogenetic species concept, so unfortunately I think the BSC is still dominant. There's some empirical work on this though! https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982221004334

mutualismecology.bsky.social•71 days ago

I was just about to post this. I show these data when I teach evolution and species concepts.

akpinion.bsky.social•71 days ago

Yes

rafamarcondes.bsky.social•71 days ago

Definitely the prevalent concept in ornithology—tho no one among us is as naïve as to apply it as no fertile hybrids whatsoever. More like assortative mating.

aauerbach.bsky.social•71 days ago

Ornithology *definitely* doesn’t use a strict BSC! I feel like the strong emphasis on integrative taxonomy at least with the NACC and SACC complicates this further?

rafamarcondes.bsky.social•71 days ago

SACC and maybe NACC explicitly adopt the (relaxed) BSC as their “official” concept. Can’t pass a split through them without (maybe indirect) evidence of reproductive isolation, even with strong diagnosability and monophyly. (I know because i tried 🥲)

wrightam.bsky.social•71 days ago

I agree with @peterjwagner3.bsky.social in your thread that, while people acknowledge the weaknesses, I think the sort of "default" brain concept most people operationally apply is the BSC or a relaxed version thereof.

akpinion.bsky.social•71 days ago

I think this is an unfortunate result of the lag of the American education system that teaches this to highschoolers

wrightam.bsky.social•71 days ago

I dunno, I definitely encounter this type of thinking among my non-American colleagues.

akpinion.bsky.social•71 days ago

Really? Interesting

daveyfwright.bsky.social•71 days ago

Yeah I've been under the impression that the majority of biologists say something like BSC when asked but sometimes admit caveats. The answer usually depends on who you're talking to (i.e., another biologist, another scientist outside who's not a biologist, the general public, etc.)

stairwaytokevin.bsky.social•71 days ago

I have to imagine (or at least hope) BSC is less common among plant biologists

jcons.bsky.social•71 days ago

any alan templeton heads. anyone into genetic cohesion

wrightam.bsky.social•71 days ago

everything I work with is dead, so why not

knechtfour.bsky.social•71 days ago

I'm curious to hear why you hope that. (As someone who tries to understand speciation in plants.)

stairwaytokevin.bsky.social•71 days ago

I think there’s too much reticulate evolution, hybridization, allopolyploidy, and viable intergeneric crosses for it to really be viable.

knechtfour.bsky.social•71 days ago

Do allopolyploids lead to gene flow between the parentals? If selection against hybrids (especially intergeneric) is insufficient to prevent gene flow, isn't that just reflecting our ability to delimit species?

jrossibarra.bsky.social•71 days ago

Kevin, the Botanical Species Confusion is very common among plant biologists

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply