Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 49 (9181 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,278 Year: 5,535/9,624 Month: 560/323 Week: 57/143 Day: 19/11 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Galapagos finches
Member (Idle past 5990 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 70 of 104 (89060)
02-27-2004 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Tamara
02-26-2004 3:10 PM

Re: margulis
Hi Tamara,
I confess to not having "Acquiring Genomes" (although it's on my "to get around to eventually" list). You cited her as saying
Goes on to describe Dobzhansky's classic 2 fly populations as "only reproductive isolation" and not speciation.
Since reproductive isolation is the identifying feature in the most commonly accepted definition of species (i.e., the biological species concept, which in spite of its flaws - which is a whole 'nother discussion - is a pretty useful concept), the quote seems a bit odd. Could you synopsize or identify how Margulis defines "species" and "speciation"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Tamara, posted 02-26-2004 3:10 PM Tamara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Tamara, posted 02-27-2004 4:01 PM Quetzal has not replied

Member (Idle past 5990 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 77 of 104 (89235)
02-28-2004 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Tamara
02-27-2004 9:26 PM

Re: genetical identical but not interfertile?
Hmm, seems like a logical extension of her serial endosymbiosis theory. However, whereas there's a lot of good evidence for SET at the microbial level, it sounds like she may be extending that beyond what can be supported. Not saying I disagree - I admitted I haven't read "Acquiring Genomes" (the only two books I've read of hers are "Symbiotic Planet" which was mostly new-agey philosophy with a dash of science, and "Microcosmos" which was fascinating and dealt with SET mostly). Obviously, to be able to argue the case one way or the other I'm going to have to read the book. (*grumbles*, another bloody tome on my reading list - maybe I'll pick it up before my next trip).
I would caution you about Margulis, however. Her ideas are extremely interesting, but she occasionally gets very assertive and positive sounding in areas which are not really well-supported. IOW, she's been known to overstate the case - a lot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Tamara, posted 02-27-2004 9:26 PM Tamara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Tamara, posted 02-28-2004 10:11 AM Quetzal has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024