Abstract
In the absence of a single universally accepted species concept, taxonomists rely on working conventions when defining species. One such convention is based on the intuition that no specimen is in more than one existing species: species are disjoint and their definitions should be mutually exclusive. When two species definitions both describe one and the same specimen, the two definitions are not mutually exclusive and do not conform to this assumption. Uncorrected, such nonexclusive species definitions make taxonomic indistinctness. Here the author, after exploring the notion of mutual nonexclusiveness, presents simple ways to revise or replace a pair of currently accepted species definitions if they are found to be mutually nonexclusive. The author shows some possible consequences of not doing so in two important areas of biologic research—species diversity studies, and heterospecific hybridization experiments. There is a semiformal discussion of nonexclusiveness in an appendix.References
Agapow, P-M., Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Crandall, K.A., Gittleman, J.L., Mace, G.M., Marshall, J.C. & Purvis, A. (2004) The impact of species concept on biodiversity studies. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 79(2), 161–179.
Aguiar, A.P. (2005) An accurate procedure to describe colors in taxonomic works, with an example from Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera). Zootaxa, 1008, 31–38.
Beckner M (1959) The biological way of thought. Columbia University, New York, 200 pp.
Dayrat, B. (2005) Towards integrative taxonomy. Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society, 85, 407–415.
Dominguez, J., Velando, A., Ferreiro, A. (2005) Are Eisenia fetida (Savigny, 1826) and Eisenia andrei Bouche (1972) (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) different biological species? Pedobiologia, 49, 81–87.
Dubois, A. (2005) Proposed rules for the incorporation of nomina of higher-ranked zoological taxa in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 1. Some general questions, concepts and terms of biological nomenclature. Zoosystema, 27(2), 365–426.
Frost, D.R. & Kluge, A.G. (1994) A consideration of epistemology in systematic biology, with special reference to species. Cladistics, 10, 259–294.
Groves, C. (2001) Primate Taxonomy. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C., 350 pp.
Heiser, C.B., Smith D.M., Clevenger, S.B. & Martin, W.C. (1969) The North American sunflowers (Helianthus). Memoirs of the Torrey Botanical Club, 22(3), 1–218.
Hubbs, C.L. (1955) Hybridization between fish species in nature. Systematic Zoology, 4, 1–20.
Huskins, C.L. (1929) Criteria of hybridity. Science, 69, 399–400.
Isaac, N.J.B., Mallet, J. & Mace, G.M. (2004) Taxonomic inflation: its influence on macroecology and conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 19(9), 464–469.
Jardine, N., Sibson, R. (1968) A model for taxonomy. Mathematical Biosciences, 2, 465–482.
Kornet, D.J. (1993) Permanent splits as speciation events: a formal reconstruction of the internodal species concept. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 164(4), 407–435.
Mahner, M. & Bunge, M.A. (1997) Foundations of Biophilosophy. Springer, Berlin, 423 pp.
McDade, L. (1984) Systematics and reproductive biology of the Central American species of the Aphelandra pulcherrima complex (Acanthaceae). Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 71(1), 104–165.
McDade, L. (1990) Hybrids and phylogenetic systematics: I. Patterns of character expression in hybrids and their implications for cladistic analysis. Evolution, 44(6), 1685–1700.
Mecklenburg, C.W., Mecklenburg, T.A. & Thorsteinson, L.K. (2002). Fishes of Alaska. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, 1037 pp.
Mellor, DH (1977). Natural kinds. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 28(4), 299–312.
Michener, C.D. (1963) Some future developments in taxonomy. Systematic Zoology, 12, 151–172.
Olby, R.C. (1966) Origins of Mendelism. Constable, London, 204 pp.
Quine, W.V. (1982) Methods of Logic. edition 4. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 333 pp.
Rieseberg, L.H. (1991) Homoploid reticulate evolution in Helianthus (Asteraceae): evidence from ribosomal genes. American Journal of Botany, 78(9), 1218–1237.
Rieseberg, L.H., Ellstrand, N.C. (1993) What can molecular and morphological markers tell us about plant hybridization? Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 12(3), 213–241.
Rosen, D.E. (1979) Fishes from the uplands and intermontane basins of Guatamala: revisionary studies and comparative geography. Bulletin of the Museum of Natural History, 162 (5), 269–375.
Skarzynski, D. (2004) Taxonomic status of Ceratophysella denticulata, C. engadinensis and C. stercoraria (Collembola: Hypogastruridae) in light of laboratory hybridization studies. Insect Systematics and Evolution, 35, 277–284.
Sneath PHA, Sokal RR (1973) Numerical taxonomy. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 573 pp.
Van Regenmortel M. (1997) Viral species. In: Claridge, M.F., Dawah, H.A., & Wilson, M.R., (Eds), Species: the Units of Biodiversity. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 1–22.
Wagner, W.H. (1962) Irregular morphologic development in hybrid ferns. Phytomorphology, 12(1), 87–100.
Winston, J.E. (1999) Describing Species: Practical Taxonomic Procedure for Biologists. Columbia University, New York, 518 pp.
Wolstenholme, J.K., Wallace, C.C. & Chen, C.A. (2003) Species boundaries within the Acropora humilis species group (Cnidaria; Scleractinia). Coral Reefs, 22, 155–166.