mobile - desktop |
Available Now at RodentPro.com! |
News & Events:
|
|
[ Login ] [ User Prefs ]
[ Search Forums ] [ Back to Main Page ] [ Back to Taxonomy Discussion ] [ Reply To This Message ] [ Register to Post ] |
Posted by: rhyion at Sat Jan 14 13:14:53 2006 [ Report Abuse ] [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by rhyion ] i was thinking, how we group animals. u got ur genus then ur species then a subspecies. but is there any middle ground in there? like can there be a species with many different morphs and hybirds and different patterns, yet they are all simply the same species? i dont think we can group animals that easily. ill use s few examples. look at the eastern racer, with the subspeacies northern black racer and southern black racer. they are like the same thing. and look at an eastern milk snake and a pueblan milk snake. they are the smae species but look way different. so in other words a northern black racer is to a southern black racer as an eastern milk is to a pueblan milk. but there seems to be way closer of a connection to racer subspecies and milk snake sub species. so is separating and grouping animals really that simple and clear cut? like can there be a population thats 2/3rds one thing and 1/3rd another? or can u have a population evolve in such a way that it eventually becomes its own subspecies? [ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ] | ||
>> Next Message: RE: is taxonomy really that simple? - HaroldD, Thu Jan 19 09:55:56 2006 >> Next Message: Nobody claimed it was simple, but... - mci, Thu Jan 19 20:48:36 2006 >> Next Message: RE: is taxonomy really that simple? - ratsnakehaven, Mon Feb 6 13:07:02 2006 >> Next Message: RE: is taxonomy really that simple? - aquick, Thu Mar 30 22:06:34 2006 >> Next Message: RE: is taxonomy really that simple? - CKing, Sun Apr 9 22:19:59 2006 |
AprilFirstBioEngineering | GunHobbyist.com | GunShowGuide.com | GunShows.mobi | GunBusinessGuide.com | club kingsnake | live stage magazine
|