Hi all,
The distance I cited related to cytochrome-b, which mutates up to 10 ten
times faster than nuclear genes. There would obviously be some genetic
difference since Diomedea epomophora sanfordi differs from Diomedea
epomophora epomophora in the colour of the upperwing. This appears, like
many differences within D.exulans to involve neoteny, and this in such cases
involves just switching off a gene or genes which would normally lead to the
adult plumage. This can be a very slight genetic change.
Dr John Penhallurick
86 Bingley Cres
Fraser A.C.T. 2615
Australia
email:
Phone: Home (612) 62585428
Mobile:0408585426
Please visit my website:http://www.worldbirdinfo.net
-----Original Message-----
From:
On Behalf Of Dave Torr
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 4:13 PM
To: Greg & Val Clancy
Cc: Birding-aus
Subject: Albatross taxonomy
I have a problem (as a non biologist) with this statement - and with a
recent post from John Penhallurick in which he stated (from memory) that two
of the possible Albatross species could not be separated genetically based
on analysis of a certain gene.
Now to my ignorant way of thinking all characteristics of animals (except
possibly some learnt behaviour?) are determined by genes. If I can tell the
difference between a Chestnut Teal and a Grey Teal then there must surely be
some genes (or parts of genes) which differ - otherwise why are the two
species obviously different to me? To say they are indistinguishable
genetically implies to me that either characteristics such as colour are not
determined by genes (in which case what does determine them?) or that the
analysis of genes is based on either a subset of the entire gene (and is
thus missing such components) or is not sufficiently sensitive to determine
such differences.
I would be interested to have someone who understands such matters explain
in simple terms how birds that cannot be separated genetically have such
different appearances.
Dave
2009/7/8 Greg & Val Clancy <>
> I received the following re. albatross taxonomy from Walter Boles today:
>
> This topic is certainly not resolved. The species concept adopted has a
> considerable influence. The multi-species classification of albatrosses
> being quite valid under a phylogenetic species concept. In the list, we
> chose to adhere closer to the biological species concept. That said,
> there is possible some evidence that some of the traditional subspecies
> within one species can meet on some breeding islands without mating
> (acting towards each other like species). This may indicated that,
> despite the low levels of genetic divergence, the two forms are
> biological species. Similar cases could be Grey and Chestnut Teal and
> Masked and White-browed Woodswallows, pairs in which members cannot be
> separated genetically but certainly different species.
>
> Stay tuned.
>
> web
> www.birding-aus.org
> birding-aus.blogspot.com
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
