Sub species?? worried of Hastings scribbles

Subject: Sub species?? worried of Hastings scribbles
From: Penn Gwynne <>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:40:27 -0800 (PST)

G'day Mark and Alan,

What an interesting hypothesis eh? mind you at first I was very worried as I thought you both were informing the world that Sub's had in fact found a way to multiply?

I know for a fact that many naughty navy things happen under walter but raleigh have I thought that subs could multiply of and on there own accord?

Happy Christmas lads ...... and not too much Office Brandy or Rum okay.

John A. Gamblin waaanders off singing:

"Those beaks run through my hair,"

"That strange come feed me stare,"

"They strip my pantry bare, that's bird talk,"

"And I've got no defence for it,"

"Their heat is too intense for it,"

"What good would Ozzie cents for them do,"

Hmm I wonder how many on this list are now singing :^D>>>


"Well for what it is worth I think you are right but always remember that taxonomy is a Procrustean Bed." To a point possibly. Phylogenetics is real, interpretation is subjective. I am a proponent of species-groups(SG's). SG's are important because they indicate to us close association between forms. Close association means
'relatively' recent divergence from a common gene pool. When a gene pool splits new groups are formed from the split. The genera may form the pool with the species representing the major groups from the split, with subspecies representing members(variants) of each group. Is this not important? Subspecies which describe members of a species group helps to emphasise speciation events and makes the whole picture so much clearer. But in my experience phylogenetic taxonomists 'usually' prefer to stay right away from subspecies. Further to this they have the annoying habit of describing a new species when a population turns up with a unique
allozyme(pro tein) or DNA sequence. Geographical reproductive isolation DOES
NOT mean speciation in my books. This is the case where subspecies is so
very important but is pushed aside. I know its difficult with invertebrates, but I would have thought birds would not suffer from this problem.

Mark Newton

Original Message
From: Alan Gillanders <>
To: <>
Cc: birding-aus <>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDING-AUS] Subspecies??

"To me if there are no subspecies then there is no such phenomenon as speciation"

Well for what it is worth I think you are right but always remember that taxonomy is a Procrustean Bed.

Alan Gillanders

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU