RE: Tiktaalik, Great Danes and speciation

["Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>]

"Botterweg, Rrp" (ronald.botterweg@capgemini.com) wrote:

<Amazing example of intraspecific diversity: if only known from fossils, these
two would undoubtedly have been considered distinct species, if not genera.
IMHO it demonstrates the continued value of the Biological Species (and Genus)
Concept (not disregarding, but besides cladistics).>

  Students are well advised that the only true differences between Great Danes
and daschunds are developmental timing and population genetics. The are no
novel osteological or myological data available to these groups to account for
the differences, only size and proportions, and one reason why size and
proportion are (or should not) be used, even if consistent within a population,
to diagnose taxa.

  Cheers,

Jaime A. Headden
http://bitestuff.blogspot.com/

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com