+- WildFact (https://wildfact.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Information Section (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-information-section)
+--- Forum: Questions (https://wildfact.com/forum/forum-questions)
+--- Thread: Subspecies (/topic-subspecies)
Subspecies - brotherbear - 11-10-2016
When I look at lists of brown bear subspecies, I rarely find two lists exactly alike. Even the leading experts disagree about just how many actual subspecies there are. 'The Great Bear Almanac' has a page-and-a-half of subspecies listed which today are all listed as just a single subspecies: Ursus arctos horribilis. My question: is the term 'subspecies' still accepted by biologists? If so, exactly what is the definition, and how do we distinguish race from subspecies?
RE: Subspecies - sanjay - 11-10-2016
I think so, These thing are more clear in felines, for example tiger. But Sometimes differences is very very minimal and it make us to re think about it. I think a true biologist, like @tigerluver is in better position to tell it
RE: Subspecies - Pckts - 11-10-2016
I think the reason that some people are trying to simplify sub species is for conservation purposes. It's easier to reintroduce animals that may or may not be genetically pure and say "it doesn't matter cause they're all the same."
But if you took a strand of DNA I believe a geneticist would be able to tell you what each species was.... I believe.
RE: Subspecies - tigerluver - 11-16-2016
As of now, subspecies are still a valid classification. Often times, the term ecotype is used instead (such as in orcas). To put it simply, the confusion behind subspeciation is that lack of consensus on what amount of difference is needed between two populations to reach the level of subspecies distinction. There has been proposed a 75% rule, and that's what Wiltig et al. (2015) analyzed their DNA marker of choice with to come to the conclusion of there only being two tiger subspecies. Luo et al. (2004) directly challenged the aforementioned statement, referencing the definitions of subspecies proposed by O'Brien and Mayr (1991) and another reference I cannot find yet. So you see the problem, scientists can still choose what definition they prefer and frame their data in the light of their choice.
RE: Subspecies - GrizzlyClaws - 11-16-2016
It depends, some subspecies are just some local variations. For example, both South African lion and East African lion are just two regional variations of the African lion as a whole subspecies.
Whereas the Asiatic lion is truly a distinct subspecies at the genetic level.