Ron at Ron at
Fri Nov 19 15:47:08 CST 2004

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Jensen
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: neospecies

The article is an interesting one.  What I find odd is that the word
"Neospecies" is used in the title, but appears nowhere in the text of the
paper.  Rather, in the text, the expression "incipient species" is used to
to the taxon in question.  So, what is a neospecies?


In the paper I am editing, I passed along the comments I received to the
authors with the bottom line that that term is being replace in the paper
due to its lack of definition.  It looks to be an up and coming term that
needs to be defined before it ends up being found all over the place as a
new catchy terminology.  Proto-species seemed to me to be a close rephrasing
of what neospecies meant contextually in the submitted paper.  It came out
of an electrophorensic study in application to an entity that apparently is
considered to have achieved the state of species by _that_ data.  BUT, it
still could be taken as a hybrid swarm type of population in my view.
Thus, the need for something more taxonomically solid in delineating exactly
what the author's _readers_ should consider this to be.  Personally,
"neospecies" smacks of a "ranking" of taxa outside the ICZN Code and more in
line with PhyloCode - it is, so it is recognized as a thingy.   Neospecies
would be paraphyletic :-) for sure and probably polyphyletic due to their
chemical or genetic affinity with multiple established species.  No?

Ron Gatrelle

More information about the Taxacom mailing list