Print

Print


I just want to thank Edge Wade, Robert Fisher, David Becher, and Bill Eddleman for responding to my question on taxonomy.

I knew the issue was basically a splitter and lumper issue but the detail they gave was beneficial.

It all comes down to the species definition.  The following is one that, to me, seems to fit best even with all the biochemical information now available, "One or more similar groups of organisms that freely interbreed and produce fertile offspring."  I am more of a lumper and would rather designate variations as subspecies if they fit the above definition applicable for sexually reproducing organisms. Anyway, thanks again,

Terry L.Miller
Kearney HS
Clay Co., MO

__________________________________________________
*        Audubon Society of Missouri's           *
*         Wild Bird Discussion Forum             *
*------------------------------------------------*
* To unsubscribe send the message                *
*    SIGNOFF MOBIRDS-L                           *
* to [log in to unmask]                    *
* To subscribe send the message                  *
* SUBSCRIBE MOBIRDS-L your name                  *
* to [log in to unmask]                    *
*------------------------------------------------*
* To access the list archives from July 2002 on: *
* http://po.missouri.edu/archives/mobirds-l.html *
##################################################