Re: KPCOFGS

Steve Clark (ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu)
Wed, 21 Oct 1998 16:02:20 -0500

At 03:34 PM 10/21/98 -0500, Brendan Frost wrote:
>
>Hello everyone----
>
>This is another rather basic question I have.
>For the traditional "Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order,
>Family, Genus, Species" heirarchy in taxonomy, only
>one has a rigorous definition as far as I know. That
>would be species, defined (and I understand there may
>be subtleties I'm leaving out) as the set of creatures
>where any male can mate with any female and produce
>fertile offspring.
>
>1) is this still regarded as basically the definition of species?

There is a great deal of discussion on the species concept. Look at Eliot
Sober's book on the Philosophy of Biology (I think that is the tltle). The
(in)ability to reproduce is often used to delineate species, but this
breaks down with plants. It applies better to animals.

Steve
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Ph: 608-263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: 263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin
School of Medicine
600 Highland Ave
Madison, WI 53792

http://www1.bocklabs.wisc.edu/profiles/Clark,Steven.html