Splitter or Lumper? What are you

[W.T.BUY]

I kinda Like splitting and having everything in order. Knowing what is what etc. But at the same time I also like to see what could be produced when two different things would be crossed. An example would be Ctenophorus caudicinctus IMO they should be split up because of their massive distribution range as well as the massive size differences between localities (65mm-100mm) But then as the same time im curious on what could be produced when crossing between two different localities. But then when to much curiousity is created and everybody "lumps" You lose the genetic difference between all those colonies and you only have one.

To conclude I believe everything should be split into atleast sub-speices (and bred) and then breeders will have a choice between whether they would like to split or clump.

 

[derekm]

Maybe if there was an agreement between what exactly is a species, and the degree of difference needed between closely related organisms; the arguements would stop. I think people get too carried away with anything that has a slight difference or variation. For me, there can be ecological variations within the species, and still be one species.

This is roughly where I was coming from. For sexually reproducing species, I see a biological species as a group of organisms, all of whose females can technically interbreed with the males and consistently produce fertile offspring. I would consider a population that is genetically isolated from other populations in its wild state as, maybe, an ecological species. The single word "species", much less :"sub-species", doesn't IMO usefully direct our thinking toward how wild populations are naturallly mixing or isolating their gene pools and, therefore, their genetically inherited physical attributes.

 

[garycahill]

Splitter

 

[eipper]

Dependant on the genus/ genera in question...some a lumper..others a splitter

 

[krefft]

Lumper.

 

[channi]

It is a difficult question. The answer depends on the question at hand at the time. I would say I am majority lumper but given the right question I would split.

 

[jordo]

Dependant on the genus/ genera in question...some a lumper..others a splitter

Yeah same, but I'm probably more of a lumper, just coz it makes life easier

 

[Australis]

Im along the sames lines as Jordo and Eipper.

I think some species (especially snakes) get too much attention in general
leading to more splitting..? while some others (like "boring"" little skinks )are
more deserving of a closer assessment.

I want more Skink splitting in 2010 -

 

[Jungletrans]

There is really no way of knowing 100% that any snake , in any collection , is completely pure . As intergrades occur in the wild and all captives can be traced back to the wild at some point l think that you can really only go by appearance and recent breeding history .

 

[JasonL]

Im along the sames lines as Jordo and Eipper.

I think some species (especially snakes) get too much attention in general
leading to more splitting..? while some others (like "boring"" little skinks )are
more deserving of a closer assessment.

I want more Skink splitting in 2010 -

Lumpers arn't in total denial of a need for new species where it's needed but there has to be and should be good reason.. Generally, the pet hate for lumpers is the use of names describing "new species" that havn't been formally "founded" by out of control Splitters..

 

[geckodan]

Splitter if the DNA evidence has the support of repeatable strong morphometric differences

 

[Bushfire]

Lumpers arn't in total denial of a need for new species where it's needed but there has to be and should be good reason.. Generally, the pet hate for lumpers is the use of names describing "new species" that havn't been formally "founded" by out of control Splitters..

I totally agree with that!

 

[JasonL]

Splitter if the DNA evidence has the support of repeatable strong morphometric differences

Has there yet been a standard put together to identify amounts of morphometric differences when compairing various species via DNA, or even a standard DNA profile for a "species" of animal. Individuals within the same species (unless it's a cloner) have a slightly different DNA and esp over a long continuous range of say 4000kms. Individuals at either end of that range will no doubt have some variation, more than likely quite a bit, yet are really the same species (at least to a lumper) as they have no break in their distribution and would produce fertile offspring if paired together. Without any guide lines, I can see DNA used as a tool for both camps to prove themselves depending on how the information is interpreted.